Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
Juli Paris
The Valhalla Project Boosters and Insurance Ltd.
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 18:59:04 -
[151] - Quote
EMT Holding wrote:corebloodbrothers wrote:Putting it too the level where its beneficial for all ment alot of invested time. So ccp could let it sit there and fade out. Or act in line of gheir current measures, like clone penalty , take it out, and out it back once its at the level that fits cco and players standards.
That time , aftehr a large indie patch, and with the upcmming null sec occupncy levels, isnt available now. So the removal, and the reshuffling of resources that get freed up, makes alot of sense.
Its a disccison made out of choice between stuff that can be done with limited resources. Not one that said the team idea sucks, as ccp stands behind that. Sorry, I do not buy for one minute that it's even remotely similar to clone penalties. No one benefits from clone charges. It is only a negative effect that when used, becomes neutral. Teams have a benefit. There are industrial types around new eden who are making use of them already and they have a positive effect for them. Removing them because they're "not being used enough" is an absurd reason from where I'm sat. As others have said, what about all the other things that are rarely used also. Should they also be removed? Should ships that aren't used be removed while they're balanced? No and I don't think anyone would agree with that. Leave them in until a better solution is found. There will be some people who like them as they are.
I find this argument both absurd (for the above reasons quoted), and, disappointing, because it came from a CSM.
Honestly, get off teams, they are lovely.
|
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation Ineluctable.
1036
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 20:15:05 -
[152] - Quote
corebloodbrothers wrote:Putting it too the level where its beneficial for all ment alot of invested time. So ccp could let it sit there and fade out. Or act in line of gheir current measures, like clone penalty , take it out, and out it back once its at the level that fits cco and players standards.
That time , aftehr a large indie patch, and with the upcmming null sec occupncy levels, isnt available now. So the removal, and the reshuffling of resources that get freed up, makes alot of sense.
Its a disccison made out of choice between stuff that can be done with limited resources. Not one that said the team idea sucks, as ccp stands behind that. Limited resources? Limited resources?! My gosh! Scrap the NES and CCP has more than enough resources to introduce a fully developed feature to the game. What's next going to be introduced to the game in a beta status not labeled as beta? New POS system? New Sov/System Claim system? |
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
28
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 21:44:07 -
[153] - Quote
So whats happenign to the "Push/Pull effect" of industry that Crius was all about. Now we just have a push effect with Index and no more pull effects to draw people to a place.
Teams are pretty amazing, I dont do that much high sec industry as its mostly in nullsec, But when ever I build in highsec I always looked where what teams are available and what the index is, then compare that to the range from jita and find a nice spot to build. And not beeing afraid to move around when better teams show up in a system with lower Index.
People say its hard to move industry around? Is it really? You use up the minerals and move your bpo's. BPO's are easy to move. The minerals are a pain yes, but you just need to import new ones and use up the old ones at your old location.
Now in the new system all i get to look at is index and that isnt nearly as fun or interesting |
Yonis Kador
KADORCORP
491
|
Posted - 2014.12.06 23:45:09 -
[154] - Quote
Great. I've been ignoring teams anyway.
YK |
probag Bear
Xiong Offices
62
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 00:53:27 -
[155] - Quote
Firvain wrote:So whats happenign to the "Push/Pull effect" of industry that Crius was all about. Now we just have a push effect with Index and no more pull effects to draw people to a place.
Teams are pretty amazing, I dont do that much high sec industry as its mostly in nullsec, But when ever I build in highsec I always looked where what teams are available and what the index is, then compare that to the range from jita and find a nice spot to build. And not beeing afraid to move around when better teams show up in a system with lower Index.
People say its hard to move industry around? Is it really? You use up the minerals and move your bpo's. BPO's are easy to move. The minerals are a pain yes, but you just need to import new ones and use up the old ones at your old location.
Now in the new system all i get to look at is index and that isnt nearly as fun or interesting
The problem is that in high-sec, teams completely nullify the cost index "push" if you take advantage of station modifiers. For example, you can build as much as you want in Nonni and the cost index will never rise above 4%. Ever. And that's just one example. In contrast, if you build in a stationless system, your cost index quickly rises to 6, 7, eventually 8%.
A 4% cost index turns into a 1% cost index if you have a -2.5% team, which is the worst-case scenario. Teams make it so that large-scale, informed, industrialists don't have to worry about cost index. I'm turning over about 40bil of raw->finished materials per day out of a single POS, at a good profit, and I'm not even running at my peak. That's broken.
A "pull effect" is not the same thing as the complete elimination of any "push effect". |
Burl en Daire
M.O.M.S. Corp
82
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 01:59:08 -
[156] - Quote
I like the idea but never used them.
For me to want to use them I would want them to be more like the manufacturing, research and copying slots. Have each system with a station have unlimited teams in that station but the price to use them go up and effectiveness go down as more and more are employed.
POSs could have a module added that had a certain type or number of team for pilots living out of POSs to use.
TL;DR Treat teams like industry slots and have them cost more based on usage.
Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why.
Hunter S. Thompson
|
Sabriz Adoudel
Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE.
3978
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 03:48:59 -
[157] - Quote
Sad to see them go, and I definitely want them back once they are iterated upon.
Teams are an excellent source of intel on what is being built and where - information that starts fights in all areas of space. They are also a way of seeding false intel - if you want a rival's strategically important system to be attacked but can't do it yourself, just put a Titan team in there, then seed intel that they are building Titans there.
I will miss using the teams interface to search for good highsec POSes to ransom.
Edit: One issue with them is that the % production time modifiers are underpowered, and the % material cost modifiers are comparitively very powerful. And production is too fast in New Eden in general now so it's not advisable to just dial up the numbers on the % production time teams.
Chaos. Opportunity. Destruction. Excitement... Vote #1 Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10
|
Krevnos
Bert and Ernie's Jihadi Militants Drop the Hammer
12
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 04:09:32 -
[158] - Quote
CCP RubberBAND wrote:Hello Industrialists,
As part of the Crius Industry release, a feature was added that most of you are probably familiar with called Teams. This feature allows you to hire teams of specialist NPC workers to boost your industry jobs for a price.
Since then we have been closely tracking all related Industry metrics and dials and it is apparent to us that since going live usage of the feature on TQ has been very low relative to its goals (with single figure percentage use in manufacturing jobs and near nonexistent use in research). So while we definitely think that the core idea behind the feature is a good one and brings value to the game and you, in its current state it is adding the wrong type of complexity. We have done some initial investigation and It is clear that bringing it up to the quality standards you should expect of us is a large project. A project which at this time is not the highest priority for us against some of the other things we are looking at. Given this, we believe the right thing for EVE and itGÇÖs players is to remove the Teams feature from the game over the next few months until such a time as we can properly revisit it.
Our rollout plan for this would be to disable the seeding of new teams by the end of 2014, and to disable the UI features in one of the first releases of 2015. That being said, we want your input and feedback on what is ultimately a fairly unprecedented course of action for us. While we feel we have done our due diligence additional context from you is always appreciated.
Thanks for reading, Team Game of Drones
Hi CCP RubberBAND,
I am actually familiar with the Teams system, but had significant problems using the feature (UI issues, difficulty telling how much you were actually bidding for a team and last second sniping were commonplace). Moreover, the system itself was a little too cumbersome to identify teams which would actually suit the jobs I would be performing, which could take extensive lengths of time in itself.
I'm sorry that the feature didn't work out (it did appear like a great concept on paper), but I'm glad you and your team are able to take the brave step to accept that not every brilliant idea comes to fruition as, perhaps, you had anticipated. But hey, every development cycle will have its ups and downs.
I must say I'm very happy with EvE's development of late. Since the new system of 6-weekly release schedules the game is taking a significant turn in both its focus, and in what is being achieved. The game feels more dynamic and like somebody actually cares about where's it's headed. You're all doing a great job of making EvE an exciting and ever-evolving universe to be our playground. I'm telling you this now because I certainly didn't think this way a few years back in the dark days of Incarna.
Thanks CCP! |
Almethea
Trans Stellar Express
188
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 07:57:16 -
[159] - Quote
>>> LoL <<<
so much time spent on revamp and add new features in the industry process. Finally few month later...you plan to only keep the unlimited slots.
good work! keep wasting time!
Keeping active account just to shitpost
there's so many thing to fix in eve.... and they fix forum ! GJ! but ok i like it !
CCP Fozzie : AFK cloaking, however, is an entirely social form of power
|
Pak Narhoo
Splinter Foundation
1481
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 08:52:23 -
[160] - Quote
Good riddance.
Glad they're on their way out. Unneeded complexity to an already complex feature.
Hope the teams don't get hid by an airlock on their way out. |
|
DoToo Foo
Setenta Corp AL3XAND3R.
37
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 11:38:38 -
[161] - Quote
Steve Ronuken wrote:It's a shame that the feature is being removed, but with the low usage, and the problems with it, it's better to remove it until a team has the time to work on it properly, rather than leaving it in a half working state.
I disagree about removing things that have a low usage.
If you are removing it to make way for new changes, then great. But if only a few are using it, but it does no harm? Leave it in.
I am one for added complexity and subtlety in decision making, and am somewhat sad to see their loss.
All of that said, I do not use teams, and do not intend to start.
I am nervous enough with leaking information about what I do and where. Teams are like faction mods on POS, a way of screaming 'loot is here'.
I already know what loot I have and where. No need to put up signposts. Teams were signposts
|
Zifrian
Licentia Ex Vereor The Gorgon Spawn
1591
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 13:34:02 -
[162] - Quote
Here's what I posted when teams were introduced: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=4531250#post4531250
Quote:Seems to me like there will be a big free rider problem here. If anyone can use the teams in a system, then why would I ever buy one? I guess because you are competing globally and it only applies to systems, so there is competition there, but I'm not sure people are going to plink down isk to get a benefit - especially if they can get that benefit from someone else's effort.
I'm not sure how this will play out over time. It seems like this will be a very niche benefit for null sec, where you can control who builds what, but in empire I don't get it. Seems like a private or corp/alliance auction system where only you get the benefits if won might be needed but then that will just allow larger entities from pushing out the smaller ones. Keep it open and you have free riders. We'll see I guess.
This will make the market much more dynamic, which i think is great. I was hoping teams was player generated though. Ie cooperative gameplay. This isn't it IMO. It seems like this played out like I thought. I also had issues with the auction system, since it seemed obvious that the sniping effect could happen easily. I'm not sure why you didn't see this coming either.
Ultimately though I am frustrated by this because I feel like this wasn't a well thought out idea but really could have been implemented well. Now I (and others) have spent time using all the 3rd party dev support to update our apps for nothing. While I can understand you wanting to fix it, just turning it off because you can't work on it and don't have the resources is really disappointing. I understand Industry doesn't get the interest from devs (omg PVP rulz!) but you might want to consider how many people do industry that would use teams instead of the actual number of people using them. The demand is there, the implementation is the issue.
The number one issue with teams is the auction system. Sure people will complain about the bonuses but I bet those could be easily updated by adjusting your RNG for what teams it spits out. You could also duplicate bonuses on different teams so more people can get what they want.
Anyway, as others have said, leave in the teams - fix the auction system.
GÇ£Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain - and most fools do. GÇ¥ - Dale Carnegie
Maximze your Industry Potential! - Download EVE Isk per Hour!
|
probag Bear
Xiong Offices
62
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 14:23:49 -
[163] - Quote
Keep teams in the game. Create an authed CREST API endpoint that allows players to bid on teams from outside of the game. 10min cache timer. Extend the deadline of team auctions by 15 minutes every time the highest bid changes from one system to another.
There. You've solved the problem of team sniping. You've solved the problem of team auctions ending when interested parties are asleep. You've done it with minimal coding on your part (though likely not on FoxFour's part). And you no longer have to worry about the state or look, or even existence, of the in-game auction interface. The rich continue to get richer by abusing the flaws inherent in the current system. Everyone's happy. |
Gandralfr
Fot Corp
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 17:35:58 -
[164] - Quote
Why remove somthing that works even thou few people use it ?
By that logic many things shold be removed from the game... |
Arrendis
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
225
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 18:10:42 -
[165] - Quote
From Missy_Z in the TMC comments section:
Quote:How about having "teams" be actual teams of players who can all contribute to an industry job, or help it out in some way. Seriously, that would be fun and encourage indy corps. Maybe even make skills to go with it, something where you can only reasonably specialize in one thing to help boost the industry job so it encourages multiple people with different specializations to all go in to really get a boost on a job. I dunno. Something better then "pay for this and get an almost insignificant boost!"
CCP - please consider this. Giving industrialists - and industrial corps - a way to flex their muscles beyond 'we have fleets of miners' is not exactly a bad idea. Where EVE really shines and generates the most buzz is in its cooperative/competitive gameplay. (Let's face it, fleet combat is both.) Bring that to industry, please. |
probag Bear
Xiong Offices
62
|
Posted - 2014.12.07 18:12:38 -
[166] - Quote
Apparently this is not actually common knowledge:
[spoiler] Post in removal of teams thread From: Censored Name Sent: 2014.12.07 01:10 To: probag Bear
Hi,
In this thread, https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5278623#post5278623 , you state that you can build as much as you want in a station in Nonni and the index would never rise above 4%. I was under the impression that the index was based off the worth of jumps running in that system, regardless of where they are installed. Have I missed something really obvious and you're now going to make me feel stupid?
Re: Post in removal of teams thread From: probag Bear Sent: 2014.12.07 01:42 To: Censored Name
Appendix 2: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/eve-industry-all-you-want-to-know/
Basically, the fact that station modifiers are applied after the square root function is a major flaw. Starting several hundred jobs per day in Nonni would raise the cost index from 2.6% to 3.1%. Doing the same in a dead-end system would raise the cost index from 0% to 4.5%.
Re: Post in removal of teams thread From: Censored Name Sent: 2014.12.07 09:46 To: probag Bear
Well I totally missed that when I read it the first time but I'm not understanding how it "caps" the index at 4%. A station has a 0.95 install cost modifier but without doing the maths, surely that would still leave a POS with its material savings as the best place to build things?
Re: Post in removal of teams thread From: probag Bear Sent: 2014.12.07 14:11 To: Censored Name
A station doesn't modify just its install cost modifier. It modifies the install cost modifier of everything in the system. And it stacks multiplicatively with every other station.
You need to move 0.89% of New Eden's manufacturing to Nonni in order to raise its cost index above 4%. Which would never happen, since people would start moving out when the index got above 3.5%. I know from experience.
4% in a dead-end system on the other hand only needs 0.16% of New Eden's manufacturing. That's a difference of a factor of 5. And 0.16% is easily achievable by a single person; I've been at 0.23% over the last week.
Re: Post in removal of teams thread From: Censored Name Sent: 2014.12.07 16:00 To: probag Bear
So the more stations a system has, the lower index rise a single job introduces? If I were to build from a POS in Nonni, would i see a lower install cost rise assuming the same number of jobs when compared with a dead-end system?
Re: Post in removal of teams thread From: probag Bear Sent: 2014.12.07 16:28 To: Censored Name
Yes, by a huge amount. Like I wrote earlier: if you were to install a few hundred (~360?) jobs per day for the next month, the cost index in a dead-end system would go from 0% to 4.5%. The cost index in Nonni would go from 2.6% to 3.1%. Which is 1/9th of 4.5%.
Now clearly Nonni isn't the best system or I wouldn't be using it as an example.
Get the staOperations and staStations tables from the data dump, the cost indices from CREST's /industry/systems/, and do a back of the envelope calculation on how many jobs you install per day, and you can easily spit out a table of systems, sorted by which would give you the lowest cost index. Nonni will probably be top 25 even if you only have a few industry alts.
This might help; it was a bit tedious to copy-paste all that stuff from Appendix 2:
dapp={ "Factory, Shipyard, Assembly Plant, Foundry, Construction Plant, Biotech Production":0.95, "Warehouse, Chemical Storage, Academy, School":0.97, "Testing Facilities, Reprocessing Facility, Chemical Refinery":0.97 }
I've reread that post you linked me and I'd managed to skim over the relevant sentence. WTF. I had no idea that applied to highsec.
Time to use those tables you mentioned, for the first time ever. Picking a system to build in just got a whole lot more interesting! Something tells me that all the moons in Nonni are filled, I should check though!
I can't believe I missed that. I don't recall ever seeing that particular post so I probably assumed that I'd read everything already.
Thank you for your patience explaining this to me. [/spoiler] |
Tear Jar
Emolgranlan Code Enforcement Branch
189
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 03:29:37 -
[167] - Quote
Arrendis wrote:From Missy_Z in the TMC comments section: Quote:How about having "teams" be actual teams of players who can all contribute to an industry job, or help it out in some way. Seriously, that would be fun and encourage indy corps. Maybe even make skills to go with it, something where you can only reasonably specialize in one thing to help boost the industry job so it encourages multiple people with different specializations to all go in to really get a boost on a job. I dunno. Something better then "pay for this and get an almost insignificant boost!" CCP - please consider this. Giving industrialists - and industrial corps - a way to flex their muscles beyond 'we have fleets of miners' is not exactly a bad idea. Where EVE really shines and generates the most buzz is in its cooperative/competitive gameplay. (Let's face it, fleet combat is both.) Bring that to industry, please.
The main issue is "How do you do this without just encouraging people to use an army of alts?". Real players are suboptimal for this. |
Venix
An Eye For An Eye AN EYE F0R AN EYE
3
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 05:58:49 -
[168] - Quote
Are we going to be able to reopen petitions about this broken system then?
Many people have lost a lot of ISK due to the really subpar interface that came with the bidding system. I know that I lost hundreds of millions due to a simple typo and there was no safety measure or cancelation feature built in like there is in every other system.
Overall, how about some refunds for the much wasted isk that those of us who wanted to test this live feature out had to suffer? |
Fu Qjoo
Pangalactic Frontline Supply Agency
22
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 06:21:41 -
[169] - Quote
Can you please remove Guardian-Vexors and Silver Magnates? They are not used that much as well .... |
probag Bear
Xiong Offices
63
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 10:12:05 -
[170] - Quote
Venix wrote:Are we going to be able to reopen petitions about this broken system then?
Many people have lost a lot of ISK due to the really subpar interface that came with the bidding system. I know that I lost hundreds of millions due to a simple typo and there was no safety measure or cancelation feature built in like there is in every other system.
Overall, how about some refunds for the much wasted isk that those of us who wanted to test this live feature out had to suffer?
I lost about 7.5bil because my team was bugged, and disappeared 7 days before its stated retirement time. I got a 100mil GM refund without even asking though, so everything worked out in the end. |
|
Paynus Maiassus
Capital Munitions
187
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 18:17:36 -
[171] - Quote
Killing teams is a bad idea. Teams are not bad complexity, they are good complexity. If the system is flawed, just leave it until you have time to fix it. I was just starting to get into using teams. I'm bummed. Not being commonly used is not a justification for getting rid of a feature. If that were the case, bounty hunting would be removed.
The only reason to remove teams would be if they were hurting the economy for the average player. For instance, margins are lower except for the super smart rare people who have figured out teams, who end up being the only people who can make a buck. If that's the case, so that the average player can't make money in manufacturing, then sure, get rid of them. However, that reason wasn't stated.
If nobody uses them because the system isn't very good, just leave them. Fix them in a couple years or something. I mean we didn't get rid of the captain's quarters, did we? We still hope the door will open some day.
And please don't call them bad complexity. Screwed up industry UI was bad complexity. Skill point loss is bad complexity. I get that. Bad complexity is an annoyance that doesn't offer choice or player options.
Teams offer choice. They offer options. They are good complexity. Perhaps the choices and options suck right now so nobody uses them. So, leave them to be used by the very few who like them and when there's time, fix them.
Again, the only reason to actually get rid of teams would be because they are jacking up the economy for the majority of players. Outside of that, just leave them in game as a kind of crapy feature that might get fixed at some point. We all know Eve has enough of those.
They're fine. Leave them in. |
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
28
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 20:22:04 -
[172] - Quote
probag Bear wrote:Venix wrote:Are we going to be able to reopen petitions about this broken system then?
Many people have lost a lot of ISK due to the really subpar interface that came with the bidding system. I know that I lost hundreds of millions due to a simple typo and there was no safety measure or cancelation feature built in like there is in every other system.
Overall, how about some refunds for the much wasted isk that those of us who wanted to test this live feature out had to suffer? I lost about 7.5bil because my team was bugged, and disappeared 7 days before its stated retirement time. I got a 100mil GM refund without even asking though, so everything worked out in the end.
They refunded the cost for the team. So how did you end up losing 7.5 bill? |
probag Bear
Xiong Offices
63
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 20:30:38 -
[173] - Quote
Firvain wrote:probag Bear wrote:Venix wrote:Are we going to be able to reopen petitions about this broken system then?
Many people have lost a lot of ISK due to the really subpar interface that came with the bidding system. I know that I lost hundreds of millions due to a simple typo and there was no safety measure or cancelation feature built in like there is in every other system.
Overall, how about some refunds for the much wasted isk that those of us who wanted to test this live feature out had to suffer? I lost about 7.5bil because my team was bugged, and disappeared 7 days before its stated retirement time. I got a 100mil GM refund without even asking though, so everything worked out in the end. They refunded the cost for the team. So how did you end up losing 7.5 bill?
I had to temporarily lower my profit margin for a week while I waited for the next team. |
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
28
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 20:54:01 -
[174] - Quote
probag Bear wrote:Firvain wrote:probag Bear wrote:Venix wrote:Are we going to be able to reopen petitions about this broken system then?
Many people have lost a lot of ISK due to the really subpar interface that came with the bidding system. I know that I lost hundreds of millions due to a simple typo and there was no safety measure or cancelation feature built in like there is in every other system.
Overall, how about some refunds for the much wasted isk that those of us who wanted to test this live feature out had to suffer? I lost about 7.5bil because my team was bugged, and disappeared 7 days before its stated retirement time. I got a 100mil GM refund without even asking though, so everything worked out in the end. They refunded the cost for the team. So how did you end up losing 7.5 bill? I had to temporarily lower my profit margin for a week while I waited for the next team.
So instead of halting production, you chose to activly lose money? Seems like a smart thing to do |
Lady Rift
What Shall We Call It
120
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 21:00:44 -
[175] - Quote
Firvain wrote:probag Bear wrote:Firvain wrote:probag Bear wrote:Venix wrote:Are we going to be able to reopen petitions about this broken system then?
Many people have lost a lot of ISK due to the really subpar interface that came with the bidding system. I know that I lost hundreds of millions due to a simple typo and there was no safety measure or cancelation feature built in like there is in every other system.
Overall, how about some refunds for the much wasted isk that those of us who wanted to test this live feature out had to suffer? I lost about 7.5bil because my team was bugged, and disappeared 7 days before its stated retirement time. I got a 100mil GM refund without even asking though, so everything worked out in the end. They refunded the cost for the team. So how did you end up losing 7.5 bill? I had to temporarily lower my profit margin for a week while I waited for the next team. So instead of halting production, you chose to activly lose money? Seems like a smart thing to do
Re read that. He sold at a lower profit margin than he would of normally meaning he missed out on 7.5bil in profits. He still got profit from everything just not maximum profit
|
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
28
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 21:45:04 -
[176] - Quote
Lady Rift wrote:Firvain wrote:probag Bear wrote:Firvain wrote:
They refunded the cost for the team. So how did you end up losing 7.5 bill?
I had to temporarily lower my profit margin for a week while I waited for the next team. So instead of halting production, you chose to activly lose money? Seems like a smart thing to do Re read that. He sold at a lower profit margin than he would of normally meaning he missed out on 7.5bil in profits. He still got profit from everything just not maximum profit
So isntead of massive profit he got a bit less profit.. So he didnt lose anything he just didnt gain as much... |
Fifth Blade
The Nyan Cat Pirates Disband.
38
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 22:00:38 -
[177] - Quote
Firvain wrote:So isntead of massive profit he got a bit less profit.. So he didnt lose anything he just didnt gain as much...
"In microeconomic theory, the opportunity cost of a choice is the value of the best alternative forgone, in a situation in which a choice needs to be made between several mutually exclusive alternatives given limited resources. Assuming the best choice is made, it is the "cost" incurred by not enjoying the benefit that would be had by taking the second best choice available"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost
What is economics? You can't explain that! |
Firvain
Wildly Inappropriate Goonswarm Federation
28
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 22:31:46 -
[178] - Quote
Fifth Blade wrote:Firvain wrote:So isntead of massive profit he got a bit less profit.. So he didnt lose anything he just didnt gain as much... "In microeconomic theory, the opportunity cost of a choice is the value of the best alternative forgone, in a situation in which a choice needs to be made between several mutually exclusive alternatives given limited resources. Assuming the best choice is made, it is the "cost" incurred by not enjoying the benefit that would be had by taking the second best choice available" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost What is economics? You can't explain that!
Oh god, not this opportunity cost thing again... |
Nomistrav
Aliastra Gallente Federation
275
|
Posted - 2014.12.08 22:55:58 -
[179] - Quote
I mean, seriously, why is Industry Teams being singled out for this removal process based on low usage? I mean, if that were the case, wouldn't Dust 514 have already been nyxxed?
Oh wait...
Third Place Winner
Pod and Planet Fiction Contest YC114
|
Jake Rivers
Senex Legio
249
|
Posted - 2014.12.11 16:51:26 -
[180] - Quote
When teams came out I was under the impression that there would be no way to compete for the good teams and since then I never looked at them again, until I seen this post.
So since reading this yesterday I looked at teams again and have hired a few to try out. They were easy to get, I didn't get sniped in the auction, and landed a team that has actually saved me materials in a big way.
If a certain amount of people in eve are using this feature, I just do not understand your reasoning for yanking it out. Now that I have been successful at landing a team, I would use them more often.
I did look at the time saving teams and it was funny that a fancy team could save you an hour on a 2 day production, why bother when you are better off having teams to save on material.
Senex Legio
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |