| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
0
   |
Posted - 2015.01.11 02:01:23 -
[1] - Quote
Accounting for the fact that EVE is a sandbox game, and that everyone is therefore obliged to find value in their EVE time on their own terms, I'd suggest that CCP exercise its godly dev muscles to make the rarest ores more valuableGÇöby increasing demand for them in manufacturing. Or make them rarer than they already are.
My desire for this is, I admit, selfish. As a solo player, I simply don't want to assume the risk of going after the rarest ores without the potential for a substantially-higher-than-mining-in-high-sec profit. Yes, I could adopt someone else's I-get-my-EVE-joy-by-doing-things-for-their-own-sake happiness metric (or another metric like the one just noted), and there will not doubt be some who post here (or who think about posting here) that very sermon. But I'd rather just see happen what, quite frankly, makes a great deal of sense in the first place. For there is no reason the rarest ores, which come with greater risk, should have lower market value than the most abundant ores, which come with negligible risk. After all, EVE, which is in many other respects very reflective of real-world markets and risks, where the greater the risk...the higher the payout, needn't have such a backward dynamic on this front (rare vs. abundant ores).
Or, are the rarest ores, indeed, worth more, per time invested, than the most abundant ones...and I'm just missing something? |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
29732
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 02:05:39 -
[2] - Quote
You want them to be more valuable, put them on the market at a higher price and don't play 0.01 games.
Of course, that would also have to flow on to everything they are used to make, in order for everything else to be profitable too.
Overall, none and buckly's chance of happening.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Hengle Teron
Just Another Corp XIV
30639
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 02:25:40 -
[3] - Quote
now this is a thread we haven't had in a while |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 02:56:23 -
[4] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:You want them to be more valuable, put them on the market at a higher price and don't play 0.01 games.
Of course, that would also have to flow on to everything they are used to make, in order for it to all be profitable too.
Overall, none and buckly's chance of happening, but as usual, the solution to your problems doesn't lie with CCP. You want change, go and lead the change yourself. Opening up a forum discussion is "leading the change." Putting ore up on the market for the price I'd like to sell it at... that's pointless in the extreme.
"Solutions" are for problems. I'm not saying there's a problem. I'm pointing out a way the game could be improved. That's constructive. |
Vector Symian
0 Fear
2
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 02:56:41 -
[5] - Quote
As a miner myself it is tempting to consider this proposal in positive light ...
and so..
plus one for me  |
Abrazzar
Vardaugas Family
5805
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 03:08:18 -
[6] - Quote
The value of the ores is purely defined by the market. If the 'rarest' ores are not the most valuable, it's because there is far more on the market than needed. Personally I blame the way sov upgrades work on mining anomalies.
Sovereignty and Population
New Mining Mechanics
|
Hippinse
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
35
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 03:12:02 -
[7] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:For there is no reason the rarest ores, which come with greater risk,
1. A "rare" commodity that respawns without fail can cease to be "rare" if the harvesting scales up.
2. If the harvesting scales up, the price will drop. (supply -vs- demand)
3. Danger to harvesters can impede scaling and cause the commodity to remain rare, and expensive.
Since #3 isn't keeping the price low, or the supply depressed, please stop talking about 'rare' and 'risk'. This problem is happening because mining anomalies in blue donuts scales well, because it's safe and efficient. (People frequently vow on these forums that null miners will *NEVER* return to ore belts because the anomalies are so much more efficient.)
Given all that, I'm open to solutions that don't negatively impact the other sandbox dwellers who aren't actively contributing to this problem. If the people doing this to themselves want to fix it by making everyone else's ores cheaper, or everyone else's manufacturing costs higher (by changing the blueprint numbers), then I'm not sure that's an optimal fix.
Maybe just remove null ore anomalies? |
Lilith Order
Space Mermaids
Somethin Awfull Forums
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 03:18:56 -
[8] - Quote
You are confusing rare with exclusive. While there are a few minerals found in Ore exclusive to null sec, they are anything but rare.
If CCP could come up with a few new charges or ammo similar to mining crystals (they are made from pure Nocxium) but made of pure Megacyte or Zydrine, such a move would put certain minerals in a higher demand and make the Ore they come from 'more valuable'. |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 03:49:34 -
[9] - Quote
Good responses thus far (mostly). This in-game description of Arkonor gets to the heart of the matter, in my opinion:
Quote:The rarest and most sought-after ore in the known universe. A sizable nugget of this can sweep anyone from rags to riches in no time.
Really? If CCP is going to define Arkonor this way, wouldn't it be in CCP's interest to make the game parameters support this statement? They can. We players (the "market") influence trade, but only within the parameters CCPs sets. I don't think their parameters contribute to the kind of "gold rush" thinking that their description would seem to generate in players inclined toward mining careers. As it is, Arkonor can't enrich a miner faster than other ores, which are infinitely abundant and far less risky to harvest. It isn't even a contest.
Perhaps there is some cogent argument against this conclusion? |
Vector Symian
0 Fear
5
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 03:57:29 -
[10] - Quote
I think i have an idea
the "Rare" ores should be random drops in areas of low activity mixing a bit of exploration into mining in to the game.
CCP already posses the means to track low activity and allocate as desired
this would make the Prospect a very useful ship and encourage people to spread out more and see all of New Eden. |
|
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
1716
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 04:23:57 -
[11] - Quote
I agree. CCP should change the Arkonor description. Something along the lines of, "Arkonor was historically the most valuable ore until nullsec mechanics allowed the formation of enormous fields of blue savouries to form. Following this, Arkonor was mined heavily and the marker was flooded. Miners dream of the day when some risk is returned to mining, thus increasing the value of the ore."
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
582
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 06:46:02 -
[12] - Quote
Posting in a stealth "nerf organized alliances / gimme on a silver platter" thread.
Never forget: CCP Seagull and other Devs LIED to everyone during Fanfest and EVE Vegas: "Multiboxers have nothing to worry about" and "Nothing's changing regarding multiboxing".
If CCP is willing to lie about that, what's next?
|
Zappity
Stay Frosty.
A Band Apart.
1720
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 06:51:58 -
[13] - Quote
Although perhaps the price will go up just a little with the recent ban on input duplication.
Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec.
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
582
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 07:02:53 -
[14] - Quote
Zappity wrote:Although perhaps the price will go up just a little with the recent ban on input duplication.
Doubtful, as boxed mining was never an easy task that only used input broadcasting, despite what James 315 would want you to believe. Round Robin undock, fleet warp, alt-tab to select different lasers and F1, then lots of alt-tabbing + jetcanning.
Never forget: CCP Seagull and other Devs LIED to everyone during Fanfest and EVE Vegas: "Multiboxers have nothing to worry about" and "Nothing's changing regarding multiboxing".
If CCP is willing to lie about that, what's next?
|
Darth Terona
Black Rebel Rifter Club
The Devil's Tattoo
36
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 07:51:48 -
[15] - Quote
Another miner who only sees his pocket books
If ore prices go up (essentially the gold standard if eve) then everything goes up.. And you gain nothing
This is why I blow you guys up. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari
End of Life
29765
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 08:11:42 -
[16] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:Opening up a forum discussion is "leading the change."
Rubbish.
You want change, then take motivation from your selfishness and get other players to agree with you and follow.
Asking for CCP to change something is not leading. That's just whining.
Come Win At Eve - Join The Vendunari
|
Yarda Black
Militaris Industries
Northern Coalition.
530
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 09:01:55 -
[17] - Quote
Those ores are infact more rare. The risk factor of obtaining them (WH, nullsec & lowsec) is indeed there.
HOWEVER
Currently the risk is being managed by group play. You're safer mining that ore with a group of players such as a nullsec empire block or WH group.
Safer, not safe mind you.
What you're really asking is for CCP to compensate you for not utilising all available methods. You want them to "pay" you for not mining in a group.
As for CCP helping; I'm pretty sure a few ISBoxer miners are going down starting this year. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS
IDLE EMPIRE
891
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 09:48:38 -
[18] - Quote
they aren't the most valuable, therefor they aren't rare enough!
I'll join the chorus asking CCP, don't take my fancy names away from me!
In the name of the Limos, the Malkuth, and the Arbalest, so help me pod
- Mara Rinn
|
Serene Repose
2047
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 10:24:04 -
[19] - Quote
So...who's gonna "make" the ore "more valuable"?
(What is "make"? What is "valuable?" What is "is"?)
Treason never prospers. What is the reason?
Why, if it prospers, none dare call it "treason."
|
Solecist Project
All Glory to the HypnoBoobs
14719
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 10:59:06 -
[20] - Quote
Quote:I simply don't want to assume the risk
Let's wardec and suicide gank that bastard.
Ralph King-Griffin > **** you sol, years, ****ing years since thats happend
"I like the idea of them being spread out" - Mike Azariah, no context. ;)
|
|
|
J'Poll
Green Skull LLC
5396
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 11:09:31 -
[21] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:Accounting for the fact that EVE is a sandbox game, and that everyone is therefore obliged to find value in their EVE time on their own terms, I'd suggest that CCP exercise its godly dev muscles to make the rarest ores more valuableGÇöby increasing demand for them in manufacturing. Or make them rarer than they already are.
My desire for this is, I admit, selfish. As a solo player, I simply don't want to assume the risk of going after the rarest ores without the potential for a substantially-higher-than-mining-in-high-sec profit. Yes, I could adopt someone else's I-get-my-EVE-joy-by-doing-things-for-their-own-sake happiness metric (or another metric like the one just noted), and there will not doubt be some who post here (or who think about posting here) that very sermon. But I'd rather just see happen what, quite frankly, makes a great deal of sense in the first place. For there is no reason the rarest ores, which come with greater risk, should have lower market value than the most abundant ores, which come with negligible risk. After all, EVE, which is in many other respects very reflective of real-world markets and risks, where the greater the risk...the higher the payout, needn't have such a backward dynamic on this front (rare vs. abundant ores).
Or, are the rarest ores, indeed, worth more, per time invested, than the most abundant ones...and I'm just missing something?
Uhm...NO.
The value of stuff in EVE isn't set by CCP, it is set by the players.
Want to make something more valuable, control the market (hint: Technetium Cartel ) and make it more valuable yourself.
Personal channel: Crazy Dutch Guy
Help channel: Help chat - Reloaded
Public roams channels: RvB Ganked / Redemption Road / Spectre Fleet / Bombers bar / The Content Club
|
Mar'Dur Taren
The Copernicus Institute
52
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 12:11:23 -
[22] - Quote
I've always been surprised that the low sec ores are move valuable per m3 than null sec or most high sec ore. However there is a understandable reason for it.
To mine effectively in Null you need facilities and transporters and most of all protection. I'm not talking about the constant guard of a CAP force. What I'm talking about is the buffer of 5-15 systems between you and the front lines through which hostiles need to pass. They also need to pass the watchful eyes of dozens of other pilots who report all that info in intel channels. Then there are the pilots that will sally forth to take on the intruders. The mining in a null sec system typically involves, indirectly, a lot of people. However under these circumstances its pretty safe.
Now high sec mining is no longer safe. People say all you have to do is be alert and watch local and this is true to an extent. A proper tank will defeat a single attacker. However the truth is that no matter how good your tank or how alert you are, you will at least be chased out of your belt a few times in your mining stint. The actions against miners in high sec have made those ores more valuable.
Now the last factor. The middle minerals are actually more valuable because they come from ores that you usually need to go to low sec to get. Sure you can get some from ore anomalies but not enough to support the demand. And PvPers create a huge demand for ships and materials. And this is where the problem lies. There are few ways to make low sec safe. There is no buffer of systems between you and potential enemies. You need close range scouts and a CAP force to be really safe mining in low. Lastly there is no easy way to get all your mined goods out of low. However compression arrays have made this much easier than in the past. however that means the overhead of a POS which requires a more substantial corp. If not to pay for and defend the POS, then to be taken seriously with your diplomatic efforts.
Another problem I have found in low sec is the ores don't spawn as often as the ones in high sec. Combine this with the fact you cannot upgrade the system to get more ore anomalies and you make those system pay less. If the Jaspet/Hemorphite/Hedbergite/Gneiss/Dark Ochre respawned more often then you could be constantly mining it and thus making the money worth it. At the moment the built in scarcity is making mining those ores only profitable while they exist. Then for the hours they are not there you have a deficit.
I don't know the answer to this problem. One thought is to make the Covetor/Retreiver/Mackinaw/Hulk easier to tank. Just up it enough to require teamwork from gankers. That would reduce the value of high sec minerals because there would be more produced. It may even make those ships more effective in low sec. At the moment its just not worth it for a mining corp to set up in a low sec system and mine. There is one simple reason for it. Guard duty is boring as hell. No PvPer wants to sit there watching people munch roids. Or they expect a huge fee for their effort.
Proud to be a Boffin!
|
V1P3RR
Goonswarm Federation
11
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 17:39:28 -
[23] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Posting in a stealth "nerf organized alliances / gimme on a silver platter" thread.
^
|
Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
7287
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 18:36:04 -
[24] - Quote
Is it ever possible that people like the OP EVER post in the right forum?
"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway
"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
|
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
19188
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 19:02:51 -
[25] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:Is it ever possible that people like the OP EVER post in the right forum?
There isnt a correct forum for 'miner entitlement' threads.
Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
Vote Sabriz Adoudel for CSM 10!
|
Hippinse
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
36
|
Posted - 2015.01.11 20:53:18 -
[26] - Quote
Unsuccessful At Everything wrote:Ramona McCandless wrote:Is it ever possible that people like the OP EVER post in the right forum? There isnt a correct forum for 'miner entitlement' threads.
I don't think this is that. I think this is this: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=369828&find=unread (Which to me doesn't read as 'miner entitlement', but as 'prop up our rental business'.)
|
Sean Dunaway
EagleClaw Dynamics
18
|
Posted - 2015.01.12 22:03:22 -
[27] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:Accounting for the fact that EVE is a sandbox game, and that everyone is therefore obliged to find value in their EVE time on their own terms, I'd suggest that CCP exercise its godly dev muscles to make the rarest ores more valuableGÇöby increasing demand for them in manufacturing. Or make them rarer than they already are.
My desire for this is, I admit, selfish. As a solo player, I simply don't want to assume the risk of going after the rarest ores without the potential for a substantially-higher-than-mining-in-high-sec profit. Yes, I could adopt someone else's I-get-my-EVE-joy-by-doing-things-for-their-own-sake happiness metric (or another metric like the one just noted), and there will not doubt be some who post here (or who think about posting here) that very sermon. But I'd rather just see happen what, quite frankly, makes a great deal of sense in the first place. For there is no reason the rarest ores, which come with greater risk, should have lower market value than the most abundant ores, which come with negligible risk. After all, EVE, which is in many other respects very reflective of real-world markets and risks, where the greater the risk...the higher the payout, needn't have such a backward dynamic on this front (rare vs. abundant ores).
Or, are the rarest ores, indeed, worth more, per time invested, than the most abundant ones...and I'm just missing something?
Selling arknor in null is the same as selling plain veldspar in a 1.0 tradehub.
Elegance Beyond Your Dreams
Salvation Behind Your Screams
|
Argent Rotineque
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
8
|
Posted - 2015.01.12 22:14:09 -
[28] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:Good responses thus far (mostly). This in-game description of Arkonor gets to the heart of the matter, in my opinion: Quote:The rarest and most sought-after ore in the known universe. A sizable nugget of this can sweep anyone from rags to riches in no time. Really? If CCP is going to define Arkonor this way, wouldn't it be in CCP's interest to make the game parameters support this statement? They can. We players (the "market") influence trade, but only within the parameters CCPs sets. I don't think their parameters contribute to the kind of "gold rush" thinking that their description would seem to generate in players inclined toward mining careers. As it is, Arkonor can't enrich a miner faster than other ores, which are infinitely abundant and far less risky to harvest. It isn't even a contest. Perhaps there is some cogent argument against this conclusion?
Keep in mind that lorewise 1 ISK is a tremendous amount of money to non-capsuleers. |
Kousaka Otsu Shigure
36
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 02:49:32 -
[29] - Quote
Supply and demand. You have too much of them in your region? People will price them lower just to get rid of stocks. You overmine it (its not rare if you're overmining it LOL), you're part of the problem of why its so dirt cheap. 'CCP's' vision of making industry viable in nullsec that brought changes into the system - injected some lowends into null ores, better null refine rates, compression changes - is finally bearing fruit.
What's the saying... Be careful of what you wish for?
Also, there are open threads for this...'issue',
1 thread each from Science and Industry then Market Discussions
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=379424&find=unread
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=369828&find=unread
Archiver, Software Developer and Data Slave
Current Project Status: Collating Forum Posts - First Pass
|
Harrison Tato
Yamato Holdings
267
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 04:02:46 -
[30] - Quote
You gotta form a cartel then create artificial scarcity. Google De Beers. |
|
|
Exotic Matters
Fried Liver Attack
24
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 05:12:50 -
[31] - Quote
Saying the coders couldn't make mining more profitable outside highsec is not true, all it would require is that addition of ore that has a denser concentration of minerals that can only be found out there. Instead of just the regular, dense, and concentrated versions of Veldspar (and other ore) you could have some super rich ore that is like produces 1.5x the minerals of the standard version. This would give miners greater incentive to leave the perceived safety of hisec.
Supply and demand could not change this ratio of value. Undoubtedly miners would suffer most because highsec ore would decrease in value compared to goods. So be careful what you ask for. |
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
1869
|
Posted - 2015.01.13 10:44:55 -
[32] - Quote
Exotic Matters wrote:Saying the coders couldn't make mining more profitable outside highsec is not true, all it would require is that addition of ore that has a denser concentration of minerals that can only be found out there. Instead of just the regular, dense, and concentrated versions of Veldspar (and other ore) you could have some super rich ore that is like produces 1.5x the minerals of the standard version. This would give miners greater incentive to leave the perceived safety of hisec.
Supply and demand could not change this ratio of value. Undoubtedly miners would suffer most because highsec ore would decrease in value compared to goods. So be careful what you ask for.
Null Sec already has this. It's called vastly greater refining rates. Which are larger than the raw numbers suggest at first glance also, since it's not the percentages relative to 100% which matter, but the relative percent difference between the two maximum refining values.
Hence why it has become more profitable to sell raw/compressed ore in high sec rather than minerals, since Null sec can export it and get greater quantities of minerals out of the ore.
Which isn't great gameplay when it's only a capital investment and requires no maintenance (that wouldn't otherwise be paid anyway)
PoS's would make a much stronger case for the highest refines as this then presents more value to a corp based in highsec running a pos, as well as not simply packing it down every time a war dec comes along but actually continuing to use it regardless.
Anyway, back on topic, all of the ores are available in Null Sec, so Null Sec miners can always mine the most valuable ore no matter what it happens to be. In addition there are vastly more systems in Null Sec, so there are vast quantities more of this most valuable ore available. And Null Sec can get better boosts than high sec, meaning each miner brings more in. And then they can refine them fairly locally as well by using compression plus some haulers making two or three jumps to a refining station of the compressed ore, meaning that they get more minerals than high sec can for the same ore as well.
All up this gives them significantly more value mining the same ore in Null Sec already.
So any lack of profit by a Null sec miner is a failure to read the market and respond appropriately, nothing to do with game design. |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.15 23:25:29 -
[33] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Ruinoso wrote:Opening up a forum discussion is "leading the change." Rubbish. You want change, then take motivation from your selfishness and get other players to agree with you and follow. Asking for CCP to change something is not leading. That's just whining.
Rubbish. The forum is comprised of players. Players who get ideas. At least one poster has already agreed with me on a point or two.
|
Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
1328
|
Posted - 2015.01.15 23:50:01 -
[34] - Quote
Why not triple the demand for trit instead, its way easier to get a hold of :D |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.15 23:55:31 -
[35] - Quote
Yarda Black wrote:Those ores are infact more rare. The risk factor of obtaining them (WH, nullsec & lowsec) is indeed there.
HOWEVER
Currently the risk is being managed by group play. You're safer mining that ore with a group of players such as a nullsec empire block or WH group.
Safer, not safe mind you.
What you're really asking is for CCP to compensate you for not utilising all available methods. You want them to "pay" you for not mining in a group.
As for CCP helping; I'm pretty sure a few ISBoxer miners are going down starting this year.
No, I'm not asking them to pay me for anything. I'm making a suggestion that would align the idea that CCP sells in its in-game description to the market. And I'm doing so on the basis of an ISK/hr or ISK/load basis for the ore in question, factoring in risk. |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.15 23:57:59 -
[36] - Quote
Serene Repose wrote:So...who's gonna "make" the ore "more valuable"?
(What is "make"? What is "valuable?" What is "is"?)
The market value is established by the players, who respond (react?) to the parameters of the game, which are set by CCP. What I'm suggesting would clearly and directly have an effect on the value of a particular ore. Anyone who dismissed CCP's involvement in the market (and there are a number of them in this thread) is just a simpleton. They have sandboxgameitis. |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.15 23:59:58 -
[37] - Quote
J'Poll wrote:Ruinoso wrote:Accounting for the fact that EVE is a sandbox game, and that everyone is therefore obliged to find value in their EVE time on their own terms, I'd suggest that CCP exercise its godly dev muscles to make the rarest ores more valuableGÇöby increasing demand for them in manufacturing. Or make them rarer than they already are.
My desire for this is, I admit, selfish. As a solo player, I simply don't want to assume the risk of going after the rarest ores without the potential for a substantially-higher-than-mining-in-high-sec profit. Yes, I could adopt someone else's I-get-my-EVE-joy-by-doing-things-for-their-own-sake happiness metric (or another metric like the one just noted), and there will not doubt be some who post here (or who think about posting here) that very sermon. But I'd rather just see happen what, quite frankly, makes a great deal of sense in the first place. For there is no reason the rarest ores, which come with greater risk, should have lower market value than the most abundant ores, which come with negligible risk. After all, EVE, which is in many other respects very reflective of real-world markets and risks, where the greater the risk...the higher the payout, needn't have such a backward dynamic on this front (rare vs. abundant ores).
Or, are the rarest ores, indeed, worth more, per time invested, than the most abundant ones...and I'm just missing something? Uhm...NO. The value of stuff in EVE isn't set by CCP, it is set by the players. Want to make something more valuable, control the market (hint: Technetium Cartel ) and make it more valuable yourself.
See my last post... |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 00:01:24 -
[38] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:Is it ever possible that people like the OP EVER post in the right forum?
Is it ever possible that posters post on-topic? If you don't like where I posted my thread, don't post in it. |
Echo Gengod
StrangulationE77
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 04:27:01 -
[39] - Quote
Let's also just completely rework the market while we're at it. Might as well keep going while we're ahead.
This is just like a minimum wage debate.
By increasing the price of the minerals you increase the cost of production. Producers will compensate for this by increasing the price of their produced goods. Marketers then see this as a hit to supply/demand and adjust their own buy/sell orders as well. Essentially the end-result is the value of ISK deflates due to new standard set. The average person with 1bil will soon have 3bil worth the same as it did before, just with a larger number.
Please don't do this.
It hurts us all.
Just look at post WW2 Germany. |
Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
7367
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 10:13:39 -
[40] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:Ramona McCandless wrote:Is it ever possible that people like the OP EVER post in the right forum? Is it ever possible that posters post on-topic? If you don't like where I posted my thread, don't post in it.
Why not? Id post in it if it was in the RIGHT place too, silly boy.
But hey, like many have said, why actually do something in the game when you can ask CCP to do it for you?
Oh wait, I know
Because it wont happen
You want certain minerals to go up in price?
Starting ganking.
I can send you fits and tips if you like.
"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway
"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
|
|
|
Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
7367
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 10:13:39 -
[41] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:Ramona McCandless wrote:Is it ever possible that people like the OP EVER post in the right forum? Is it ever possible that posters post on-topic? If you don't like where I posted my thread, don't post in it.
Why not? Id post in it if it was in the RIGHT place too, silly boy.
But hey, like many have said, why actually do something in the game when you can ask CCP to do it for you?
Oh wait, I know
Because it wont happen
You want certain minerals to go up in price?
Starting ganking.
I can send you fits and tips if you like.
"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway
"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
|
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
3619
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 10:14:50 -
[42] - Quote
This thread has been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion.
ISD Ezwal
Vice Admiral
Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Interstellar Services Department
|
Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
7369
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 10:14:58 -
[43] - Quote
Echo Gengod wrote:
Just look at post WW2 Germany.
What about the richest country in Europe? Did it have an Arkonor surplus?
"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway
"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
|
Ramona McCandless
The McCandless Clan
7369
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 10:20:29 -
[44] - Quote
ISD Ezwal wrote:This thread has been moved to Features & Ideas Discussion.
Told you
"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway
"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
|
Nina Lowel
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 12:33:18 -
[45] - Quote
I've learned you can't make suggestions here that might make mining more of the go-to for the main mineral acquisition of the game. In order for this to happen mission refining would need to be drastically changed so that it is far more profitable to sell moduals on the market than to recycle them. I made a suggestion to turn all minerals that were from mods into a 'recycled' grade that couldn't be used in ship production but could then be 'purified' via skills but even less of the mineral value. Ex: Recycling gives like max 75% in "recycled" minerals which can then be purified to get a max return of 50% of that 75%. This would making mining skyrocket in profit while nerfing missioning ONLY if they recycled moduals but the missioners here came out in force. |
Adrie Atticus
Shadows of Rebellion
The Bastion
833
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 12:36:52 -
[46] - Quote
Nina Lowel wrote:I've learned you can't make suggestions here that might make mining more of the go-to for the main mineral acquisition of the game. In order for this to happen mission refining would need to be drastically changed so that it is far more profitable to sell moduals on the market than to recycle them. I made a suggestion to turn all minerals that were from mods into a 'recycled' grade that couldn't be used in ship production but could then be 'purified' via skills but even less of the mineral value. Ex: Recycling gives like max 75% in "recycled" minerals which can then be purified to get a max return of 50% of that 75%. This would making mining skyrocket in profit while nerfing missioning ONLY if they recycled moduals but the missioners here came out in force.
Only use for mission loot is refining, especially now that they're going to neuter the meta4 gear which still holds value. Is it a big part of current income? Yea. Will it be after tiericide? No.
I can understand why mission runners would get angry over that, because the only thing more boring than ratting is mining. It's a sensible idea which would only be opposed by hisec pilots who use solely PLEX to play. |
Nina Lowel
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 12:43:23 -
[47] - Quote
Adrie Atticus wrote:Nina Lowel wrote:I've learned you can't make suggestions here that might make mining more of the go-to for the main mineral acquisition of the game. In order for this to happen mission refining would need to be drastically changed so that it is far more profitable to sell moduals on the market than to recycle them. I made a suggestion to turn all minerals that were from mods into a 'recycled' grade that couldn't be used in ship production but could then be 'purified' via skills but even less of the mineral value. Ex: Recycling gives like max 75% in "recycled" minerals which can then be purified to get a max return of 50% of that 75%. This would making mining skyrocket in profit while nerfing missioning ONLY if they recycled moduals but the missioners here came out in force. Only use for mission loot is refining, especially now that they're going to neuter the meta4 gear which still holds value. Is it a big part of current income? Yea. Will it be after tiericide? No. I can understand why mission runners would get angry over that, because the only thing more boring than ratting is mining. It's a sensible idea which would only be opposed by hisec pilots who use solely PLEX to play.
I think that's only true because it still gives a decent amount of isk return to recycle the modules and sell the minerals. |
Tabyll Altol
Breaking.Bad
Circle-Of-Two
68
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 14:05:25 -
[48] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:Accounting for the fact that EVE is a sandbox game, and that everyone is therefore obliged to find value in their EVE time on their own terms, I'd suggest that CCP exercise its godly dev muscles to make the rarest ores more valuableGÇöby increasing demand for them in manufacturing. Or make them rarer than they already are.
My desire for this is, I admit, selfish. As a solo player, I simply don't want to assume the risk of going after the rarest ores without the potential for a substantially-higher-than-mining-in-high-sec profit. Yes, I could adopt someone else's I-get-my-EVE-joy-by-doing-things-for-their-own-sake happiness metric (or another metric like the one just noted), and there will not doubt be some who post here (or who think about posting here) that very sermon. But I'd rather just see happen what, quite frankly, makes a great deal of sense in the first place. For there is no reason the rarest ores, which come with greater risk, should have lower market value than the most abundant ores, which come with negligible risk. After all, EVE, which is in many other respects very reflective of real-world markets and risks, where the greater the risk...the higher the payout, needn't have such a backward dynamic on this front (rare vs. abundant ores).
Or, are the rarest ores, indeed, worth more, per time invested, than the most abundant ones...and I'm just missing something?
Maybe the are so cheap becuase the 0.0 is not that dangerous at all to mine. the most valuable ores are in lowsec which seem fair.
-1
|
Darth Terona
Black Rebel Rifter Club
The Devil's Tattoo
38
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 15:16:06 -
[49] - Quote
Ore price is based on mineral yield of that ore
You cannot raise the price of the ore because it will raise the price of minerals within it.
Increasing the mineral yield of ores would have the opposite affect through over supply
Nearly everything in the game is made by players. Those items require minerals to build. Price is set based on mineral value of that item + cost of production + incentive...
You cannot alter the base building block of this economy (minerals via ores) without altering the cost of everything in the game.
Want more returns? Build **** with your minerals and ores yourself. Cut out the middle man. |
Lugh Crow-Slave
498
|
Posted - 2015.01.16 19:22:42 -
[50] - Quote
the value of ore is left up to us not CCP
Fuel block colors
|
|
|
Ruinoso
Dispensation
3
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 03:40:34 -
[51] - Quote
Ramona McCandless wrote:Ruinoso wrote:Ramona McCandless wrote:Is it ever possible that people like the OP EVER post in the right forum? Is it ever possible that posters post on-topic? If you don't like where I posted my thread, don't post in it. Why not? Id post in it if it was in the RIGHT place too, silly boy. But hey, like many have said, why actually do something in the game when you can ask CCP to do it for you? Oh wait, I know Because it wont happen You want certain minerals to go up in price? Starting ganking. I can send you fits and tips if you like.
Since you have no understood the point of the thread, I bow out of your contribution to it. |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
3
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 03:42:45 -
[52] - Quote
Echo Gengod wrote:Let's also just completely rework the market while we're at it. Might as well keep going while we're ahead.
This is just like a minimum wage debate.
By increasing the price of the minerals you increase the cost of production. Producers will compensate for this by increasing the price of their produced goods. Marketers then see this as a hit to supply/demand and adjust their own buy/sell orders as well. Essentially the end-result is the value of ISK deflates due to new standard set. The average person with 1bil will soon have 3bil worth the same as it did before, just with a larger number.
Please don't do this.
It hurts us all.
Just look at post WW2 Germany.
I don't think you understood the point of my OP. This is not about raising prices. This is about honoring the in-game description of the "rarest" ores, which are claimed to make one rich with a mere chunk of the stuff. That doesn't pan out, on either an ISK-per-hour or ISK-per-risk basis. As yet, people have argued against many a straw-man assertion, but not against the point. |
Zimmer Jones
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
48
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 03:56:04 -
[53] - Quote
You are correct, the description should be more vague in reference to rarity and value. Add one word and its solved; historically.
No more problems, business as usual. |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
3
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 05:44:45 -
[54] - Quote
Zimmer Jones wrote:You are correct, the description should be more vague in reference to rarity and value. Add one word and its solved; historically.
No more problems, business as usual.
That's a boring solution, but it would work. :) |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
474
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 06:05:51 -
[55] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:Zimmer Jones wrote:You are correct, the description should be more vague in reference to rarity and value. Add one word and its solved; historically.
No more problems, business as usual. That's a boring solution, but it would work. :)
Practical, effective and with a 100% chance of success. I approve if lore is going to be used to justify any changes.
Making battleships worth the warp
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
474
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 06:10:54 -
[56] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:Echo Gengod wrote:Let's also just completely rework the market while we're at it. Might as well keep going while we're ahead.
This is just like a minimum wage debate.
By increasing the price of the minerals you increase the cost of production. Producers will compensate for this by increasing the price of their produced goods. Marketers then see this as a hit to supply/demand and adjust their own buy/sell orders as well. Essentially the end-result is the value of ISK deflates due to new standard set. The average person with 1bil will soon have 3bil worth the same as it did before, just with a larger number.
Please don't do this.
It hurts us all.
Just look at post WW2 Germany. I don't think you understood the point of my OP. This is not about raising prices. This is about honoring the in-game description of the "rarest" ores, which are claimed to make one rich with a mere chunk of the stuff. That doesn't pan out, on either an ISK-per-hour or ISK-per-risk basis. As yet, people have argued against many a straw-man assertion, but not against the point.
It is your proposal. Thus the burden of communication falls squarely on you. Make us understand what it is you want in no uncertain terms. Be crystal clear and if necessary, use formal logic and the symbolic representation of said logic.
Making battleships worth the warp
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
Anhenka
The Cult of Personality
DARKNESS.
900
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 06:28:35 -
[57] - Quote
Nina Lowel wrote:I've learned you can't make suggestions here that might make mining more of the go-to for the main mineral acquisition of the game. In order for this to happen mission refining would need to be drastically changed so that it is far more profitable to sell modules on the market than to recycle them. I made a suggestion to turn all minerals that were from mods into a 'recycled' grade that couldn't be used in ship production but could then be 'purified' via skills but even less of the mineral value. Ex: Recycling gives like max 75% in "recycled" minerals which can then be purified to get a max return of 50% of that 75%. This would make mining skyrocket in profit while nerfing missioning ONLY if they recycled modules but the missioners here came out in force.
Your idea was bad when you posted it because it was based on a spurious assumption that a large percentage of the mineral market came from reprocessed loot, when in reality, only a tiny fraction of the mineral market comes from loot.
It was not this way at one point, but then they (in no particular order)
0: removed NPC shuttle sell orders, removing the trit price ceiling
1: slightly reduced rat drops across the board.
2: removed drone poo from the game (this was absolutely massive)
3:slightly reduced it yet again.
3: removes meta 0 mods from rat drops, cutting it by a quarter or so
4: cut refining returns of modules by half.
All in all, including the drone poo removal, they probably reduced the amount of minerals coming from non mining sources by 95% or more.
But apparently, when everyone (from many walks of EVE) pointed out that reprocessed modules no longer accounted for any significant portion of the mineral flow, we were all just dirty missioners who couldn't understand a good idea when we saw it.
On a more serious note: Trit is over 6 isk a unit. I remember when it was under 3, under 4, under 5, under 6. And it is still slowly rising. You miners have it so much better than your compatriots of years past and yet all you do is continue to whine about how harsh you have it with sky high prices on the most basic and readily available mineral types. And then you wonder why people wont take you seriously. |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
3
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 06:32:58 -
[58] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Ruinoso wrote:Echo Gengod wrote:Let's also just completely rework the market while we're at it. Might as well keep going while we're ahead.
This is just like a minimum wage debate.
By increasing the price of the minerals you increase the cost of production. Producers will compensate for this by increasing the price of their produced goods. Marketers then see this as a hit to supply/demand and adjust their own buy/sell orders as well. Essentially the end-result is the value of ISK deflates due to new standard set. The average person with 1bil will soon have 3bil worth the same as it did before, just with a larger number.
Please don't do this.
It hurts us all.
Just look at post WW2 Germany. I don't think you understood the point of my OP. This is not about raising prices. This is about honoring the in-game description of the "rarest" ores, which are claimed to make one rich with a mere chunk of the stuff. That doesn't pan out, on either an ISK-per-hour or ISK-per-risk basis. As yet, people have argued against many a straw-man assertion, but not against the point. It is your proposal. Thus the burden of communication falls squarely on you. Make us understand what it is you want in no uncertain terms. Be crystal clear and if necessary, use formal logic and the symbolic representation of said logic.
I was very clear in my OP. People don't read carefully. Others read off-topic responses to the OP and assume they've read the OP. Other posters' carelessness or ineptitude isn't my problem. |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
585
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 06:41:02 -
[59] - Quote
You made a spacious request to increase it's use in manufacturing, which doesn't change it's rarity. Rarity is dictated by supply.
You did request to limit the supply, but you failed to grasp the magnitude of nullsec alliance's mining branches, and what goes into securing a system for your miners. People have min/maxed this a long time ago.
You were told this many times, but you ignored it. |
Ruinoso
Dispensation
3
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 06:56:49 -
[60] - Quote
If the benefit-to-risk ratios of mining the most common ores in highsec vs. the rarest ores in nullsec are close to one another, are even, or are shown to favor the former, then the rarest ores in nullsec cannot reasonably be said to be all that rare, nor can they be said to be so sought after that a mere chunk of the stuff would make a pilot rich. That's the position in a nutshell. Until that is addressed, does it matter what one thinks about the mechanism proposed to affect the rarest ores' rarities? I don't think so. So far, everyone has an opinion about the latter, but few have addressed the former. |
|
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
475
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 07:12:27 -
[61] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:James Baboli wrote:It is your proposal. Thus the burden of communication falls squarely on you. Make us understand what it is you want in certain terms. Be crystal clear and if necessary, use formal logic and the symbolic representation of said logic. I was very clear in my OP. People don't read carefully. Others read off-topic responses to the OP and assume they've read the OP. Other posters' carelessness or ineptitude isn't my problem.
If I need to read carefully, either the subject is deeply technical, or the writing is bad. As you have stated that you think the OP is clear, I will do a fill critique for you, so you can edit if you see fit, or improve any future posts.
Definitions:
There was no clear statement of what you mean by rare. Does this mean the 5 & 10% yield ores? ABCs? You don't specify except by a single example.
Organization
There was no single sentence which contained the basic idea as simply as ppossible.
You open at least two methods of making the cahnges you want but neither is spelled out clearly in its own sentence, paragraph or other logically sized chunk.
There are three text blocks of approximately paragraph size without cohesive theme to them, and with out any transition or link.
Assumptions
You present the problem you want to solve as a given, without but a single refrence to the description. This means it is easy to argue that your selected issue is an actual problem.
You present the implicit assumption that lore should be a primary driver of game mechanics.
Content:
You present two very early concept level ways of reconciling game mechanics with lore, but they aren't even fleshed out enough to be called skeleton s.
Making battleships worth the warp
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
Ruinoso
Dispensation
3
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 07:13:35 -
[62] - Quote
James Baboli wrote:Ruinoso wrote:James Baboli wrote:It is your proposal. Thus the burden of communication falls squarely on you. Make us understand what it is you want in certain terms. Be crystal clear and if necessary, use formal logic and the symbolic representation of said logic. I was very clear in my OP. People don't read carefully. Others read off-topic responses to the OP and assume they've read the OP. Other posters' carelessness or ineptitude isn't my problem. If I need to read carefully, either the subject is deeply technical, or the writing is bad. As you have stated that you think the OP is clear, I will do a fill critique for you, so you can edit if you see fit, or improve any future posts. Definitions: There was no clear statement of what you mean by rare. Does this mean the 5 & 10% yield ores? ABCs? You don't specify except by a single example. Organization There was no single sentence which contained the basic idea as simply as ppossible. You open at least two methods of making the cahnges you want but neither is spelled out clearly in its own sentence, paragraph or other logically sized chunk. There are three text blocks of approximately paragraph size without cohesive theme to them, and with out any transition or link. Assumptions You present the problem you want to solve as a given, without but a single refrence to the description. This means it is easy to argue that your selected issue is an actual problem. You present the implicit assumption that lore should be a primary driver of game mechanics. Content: You present two very early concept level ways of reconciling game mechanics with lore, but they aren't even fleshed out enough to be called skeleton s.
Then don't waste your time posting in my thread. Go to the threads written by college professors and the like. Capice? |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
475
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 07:18:48 -
[63] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:If the benefit-to-risk ratios of mining the most common ores in highsec vs. the rarest ores in nullsec are close to one another, are even, or are shown to favor the former, then the rarest ores in nullsec cannot reasonably be said to be all that rare, nor can they be said to be so sought after that a mere chunk of the stuff would make a pilot rich. That's the position in a nutshell. Until that is addressed, does it matter what one thinks about the mechanism proposed to affect the rarest ores' rarities? I don't think so. So far, everyone has an opinion about the latter, but few have addressed the former.
It isn't so much an issue of overabundance of high end minrtals as it is an explosion of demand for the low end stuff and a near simultaneous reduction in supply. This makes the low end substantially more value.
Making battleships worth the warp
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
585
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 07:22:26 -
[64] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:Then don't waste your time posting in my thread. Go to the threads written by college professors and the like. Capice?
He just handed to you on a silver platter an easy way to clean up your idea and present it in a way that would deter trolls and possibly garner constructive criticism. |
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
475
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 07:24:21 -
[65] - Quote
Ruinoso wrote:James Baboli wrote:Ruinoso wrote:James Baboli wrote:It is your proposal. Thus the burden of communication falls squarely on you. Make us understand what it is you want in certain terms. Be crystal clear and if necessary, use formal logic and the symbolic representation of said logic. I was very clear in my OP. People don't read carefully. Others read off-topic responses to the OP and assume they've read the OP. Other posters' carelessness or ineptitude isn't my problem. If I need to read carefully, either the subject is deeply technical, or the writing is bad. As you have stated that you think the OP is clear, I will do a fill critique for you, so you can edit if you see fit, or improve any future posts. Definitions: There was no clear statement of what you mean by rare. Does this mean the 5 & 10% yield ores? ABCs? You don't specify except by a single example. Organization There was no single sentence which contained the basic idea as simply as ppossible. You open at least two methods of making the cahnges you want but neither is spelled out clearly in its own sentence, paragraph or other logically sized chunk. There are three text blocks of approximately paragraph size without cohesive theme to them, and with out any transition or link. Assumptions You present the problem you want to solve as a given, without but a single refrence to the description. This means it is easy to argue that your selected issue is an actual problem. You present the implicit assumption that lore should be a primary driver of game mechanics. Content: You present two very early concept level ways of reconciling game mechanics with lore, but they aren't even fleshed out enough to be called skeleton s. Then don't waste your time posting in my thread. Go to the threads written by college professors and the like. Capice?
It ain't rocket surgery. It's basic written communication at about the high school level. You put up that you thought you were clear, I corrected an erroneous assumption. Its as simple as ctrl x to section out the bits there into 3 organized sectiond and one to two more sentences about the two changes you want, like where this added mineral cost might be.
Making battleships worth the warp
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
James Baboli
Ferrous Infernum
475
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 07:29:51 -
[66] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Ruinoso wrote:Then don't waste your time posting in my thread. Go to the threads written by college professors and the like. Capice? He just handed to you on a silver platter an easy way to clean up your idea and present it in a way that would deter trolls and possibly garner constructive criticism.
While on my phone no less.
Making battleships worth the warp
Tech 3 battleships.
Moar battleships
|
Dave Stark
7262
|
Posted - 2015.01.17 09:12:26 -
[67] - Quote
ccp can't change the price of people's market orders. or how supply and demand works. |
Les Routiers
Les Trous Du Culte
SpaceMonkey's Alliance
2
|
Posted - 2015.01.18 15:07:04 -
[68] - Quote
I'm understanding three different things from the OP. These are:
1. It feels strange that the in-game description calls rare and valuable actually aren't.
- Reason: EVE is a sandbox.
- Possible fix (1): have CCP change the ore description for Arkonor.
- Possible fix (2): find something more interesting to worry about.
2. 0.0 miners don't earn all that much more than their highsec counterparts.
- Reason: the big minerals consumers are the supercap builders, and those need a ton of trit and other low-end ores.
- Possible fix: change the 0.0 belt composition so there will be more Dense Veldspar and less Arkonor. Make the +10% roids rarer in highsec.
3. I wish 0.0 miners would earn more.
- Reason (1): EVE is not a PVP game. Between dedicated bears and bearing alts, the majority of EVE activity involves farming ISK. So there is massive overproduction, and manufactured goods are cheap.
- Reason (2): Ratting is better isk per hour.
- Possible fix: hm... that's a toughie... maybe reset all mining toons (except the OP's, obviously) to 0 SP in resource gathering, while making all resource gathering skills x256?  |
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |