Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Hemmo Paskiainen
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
55
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 08:11:00 -
[1] - Quote
moon distribution in eve
2x harvesting arrays on 1 moon, harvesting 200 per hour
Monthy hours 30 days x 24 = 720
Current moon goo value *200 goo* 720 hours = profit a month
Caesium..............2936,97*200*720 = 422.923.680 ISK Technetium...........100.975,76*200*720= 14.540.509.440 ISK Hafnium................1999,99*200*720= 287.998.560 ISK Mercury..................3779,63*200*720= 544.266.720 ISK
Promethium.......5509,44*200*720= 793.359.360 ISK Dysprosium.......9698*200*720 = 1.396.512.000 ISK Neodymium.......20396,99*200*720= 2.937.166.560 ISK Thulium..............2426,84*200*720= 349.464.960 ISK
#1. Technetium moons are the most centralised moons in EVE #2. The Regions in where Technetium is located forms a geographic island witch greatly benefits its defenders #3. A techitium cartel has been formed witch doesnt sell under 100,000 ISK p/u due reson #1 #4. The income compared to other R32 moons is so much more hugh that there need to be somthing broken #5. The hugh income from #3 & #1 has a too big effect on 0.0 politic situation. #6. After the T2 material change, T2 ships got more expensive whitchs has negative effect on pvp #7. The NIP between the Techcartel allows people to build tech funded supercapital production risk free #8. The unfair ISK income makes it unpossible to break the Tech Cartel #9. 1 R32 moon has 6 x more value than the most profitable R64 moon yet the R64 is more rare #10. Someone was sleeping the last T2 ship materiala got change #11. There must be something wrong if even the holders say the gain too much isk form the moons #12. 269 X 14,540 million = 3900,5 Billion isk go-¦s into 2-3 Allainces EACH MONTH
Let The Trolling Begin!! CCP FIX BLACK OPS FFS |
Florestan Bronstein
United Highsec Front The 99 Percent
206
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 08:19:00 -
[2] - Quote
#1. I don't have a tech moon.
no further reasons required. |
Akrasjel Lanate
Naquatech Conglomerate
250
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 08:40:00 -
[3] - Quote
Florestan Bronstein wrote:#1. I don't have a tech moon.
no further reasons required. Yea
But to the point, Tech moons need to be rebalanced equaly for all regions. |
Pak Narhoo
Knights of Kador
69
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 08:43:00 -
[4] - Quote
Best offered idea I think the player base came up with was make them deplete and spawn new "veins" of moon goo elsewhere on other moons, which may, or may not lead to more fighting over territory. |
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1362
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 08:48:00 -
[5] - Quote
Can you show me evidence of a NIP between the tech-holding alliances in the game?
It doesn't exist.
In any case, tech IS getting nerfed. |
Ciar Meara
Virtus Vindice
353
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 08:54:00 -
[6] - Quote
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:But to the point, Tech moons need to be rebalanced equaly for all regions.
Why would people want to fight over regions if everything was distributed fairly? We are not after a magical happy poneyland in space, this games thrives on conflict, and the yearning for more wealth (aka more power) is one of the biggest driving forces.
Don't forget the need for greed, betrayal and downright sabotage that is driven by the lust for more ISK. - [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow] |
Caldari Citizen20110707
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
0
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 09:05:00 -
[7] - Quote
Andski wrote:Can you show me evidence of a NIP between the tech-holding alliances in the game?
It doesn't exist.
In any case, tech IS getting nerfed.
Ask NC. Raiden. WN DFR and before tunderdome delve idea The Mitani. Only because of delve tunring dead goons have broken it.
Ciar Meara wrote: Why would people want to fight over regions if everything was distributed fairly? We are not after a magical happy poneyland in space, this games thrives on conflict, and the yearning for more wealth (aka more power) is one of the biggest driving forces.
Don't forget the need for greed, betrayal and downright sabotage that is driven by the lust for more ISK.
Greed isnt the if u as single alliance gets 1,5 trillion a month. There is more comming in than u can ever spend. The lead corpses have trusted directors & ceo-¦s why shoot the milk cow if u get enough of the slice & more by just waiting and farming. All high command are feeding on free isk, lead corparations are building up hugh saving quantities. In short, the amount of ISK gained is just too big to get greedy..
I agree on magic ponly land comment but with such quantities of isk its impossible to counter that, even with bigger blobs. With this much isk you can just suicide welp any fleet on everything important. Assume 1500b Isk per allaince, that is 50 billion isk each day that can into war reimbursement. And im not even talking about the tax and massive super cap production income. With that much isk the Arms Race is accelarated soo fast that no-one can catch up. Another poor implenting issue form ccp in the time they didnt used their heads. And they still wonder why eve population isnt growing or vets returning. I still see peek 36-37k ppl logged on when it was before 45-48k. Worst thing about this poor imbalance is that it will effect EVE 0.0 for a long time to come... |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
2122
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 09:09:00 -
[8] - Quote
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:But to the point, Tech moons need to be rebalanced equaly for all regions. Not really, no, but perhaps it's time to shift the T2 bottleneck to some other kind of gooGǪ
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
If not, contact Miss DSA to shed your wardecs. |
Hemmo Paskiainen
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
56
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 10:00:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Akrasjel Lanate wrote:But to the point, Tech moons need to be rebalanced equaly for all regions. Not really, no, but perhaps it's time to shift the T2 bottleneck to some other kind of gooGǪ
kinda pointless since current carlet just hire eveyone and his dog and moves to new position CCP FIX BLACK OPS FFS |
Ladie Harlot
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1066
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 10:13:00 -
[10] - Quote
Tech needs to be nerfed but half your list of reasons sounds like paranoid conspiracy theories and they aren't helping your argument. The artist formerly known as Ladie Scarlet. |
|
Andski
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
1362
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 10:27:00 -
[11] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Akrasjel Lanate wrote:But to the point, Tech moons need to be rebalanced equaly for all regions. Not really, no, but perhaps it's time to shift the T2 bottleneck to some other kind of gooGǪ
Mineral, highest Jita buy order Technetium,ISK 110,002.00 Neodymium,ISK 18,902.07 Dysprosium,ISK 10,002.20 Promethium,ISK 5,010.01
There should not be a "must have" moon, and R64s should not be worthless. There should be regional R32s that are more desirable than others, but not to the point where one single moon mineral is the main T2 bottleneck. |
Malcanis
Vanishing Point. The Initiative.
1475
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 10:29:00 -
[12] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Akrasjel Lanate wrote:But to the point, Tech moons need to be rebalanced equaly for all regions. Not really, no, but perhaps it's time to shift the T2 bottleneck to some other kind of gooGǪ
As long as it's not a moon goo, that's fine. Malcanis' Law: Any proposal justified on the basis that "it will benefit new players" is invariably to the greater advantage of older, richer players.
Things to do in EVE:-áhttp://swiftandbitter.com/eve/wtd/ |
Aineko Macx
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
34
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 10:48:00 -
[13] - Quote
Andski wrote:There should not be a "must have" moon, and R64s should not be worthless. There should be regional R32s that are more desirable than others, but not to the point where one single moon mineral is the main T2 bottleneck. It is very difficult to balance supply/demand so that more than 1-2 minerals reach similar market value. Even a small difference in supply/demand between minerals causes a large market value difference once the bottleneck becomes apparent.
The simplest solution to this would be to introduce some of the missing alchemy reactions. This would at least establish some bounds of mineral value relative to each other. |
Hemmo Paskiainen
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
56
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 10:51:00 -
[14] - Quote
Aineko Macx wrote: The simplest solution to this would be to introduce some of the missing alchemy reactions. This would at least establish some bounds of mineral value relative to each other.
What do u mean by this? CCP FIX BLACK OPS FFS |
Written Word
Dreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore
164
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 10:57:00 -
[15] - Quote
1. I don't have any 2. I don't have any 3. I don't have any 4. I don't have any 5. I don't have any 6. I don't have any 7. I don't have any 8. I don't have any 9. CCP it is too unfair I don't have any 10. I don't have any.
I fixed your post. |
Rixiu
North Star Networks The Kadeshi
37
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 11:22:00 -
[16] - Quote
1. I bought stockpiles of the other "high-end" minerals in speculation for moon changes. 2. I want CCP to change moons so that I can buy myself a titan. |
Aineko Macx
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
35
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 11:50:00 -
[17] - Quote
Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:Aineko Macx wrote: The simplest solution to this would be to introduce some of the missing alchemy reactions. This would at least establish some bounds of mineral value relative to each other.
What do u mean by this? There is currently no alchemy reaction for Technetium. If one was introduced, people would do it as long as the input moon minerals and the cost of running the reaction is lower than of the resulting Tech. By doing so, the supply for Tech would increase, lowering it's market value, while the demand for the alchemy minerals would increase, raising their market value. Effectively, Tech would experience a soft upper value cap relative to the cost of the alchemy minerals and of running the reaction. Likewise, the alchemy reaction input minerals would experience a minimum value floor relative to the value of the resulting tech.
This removes the Tech bottleneck as long as the alchemy input materials are not bottlenecked themselves. This is a simplification and there are some underlying assumptions, but that's basically it. |
Liam Mirren
37
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 11:53:00 -
[18] - Quote
Honestly, scarcity and uneven distribution is a good thing as it creates things to fight over. Everything being similar and evenly good creates for a dull landscape. From that POV I agree to how it is atm; if you want something you'll have to take it, preferably from someone else. It's like the old T2 cartels and even though I I don't profit from it I approve as it's very much EVE.
Having said that, the folks who do the balancing at CCP are just bad, before the current mechanics were implemented people in the community who know what they're talking about (I'm not one of them, been playing since 2004 but my total POS ownership time is less than a month) already stated it would be going to look like this. The problem is Tech being AND amazingly profitable AND very localised in distribution. It's a bit too much. If it's worth doing, it's worth doing right. |
AureoLion
Etoilles Mortant Ltd. Solyaris Chtonium
35
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 11:55:00 -
[19] - Quote
Ever heard of.. alchemy? introduce that for tech (and other bottlenecks, if any spawn) and we're set. Not to a price equalization, but somewhere differences aren't 50:1. |
Hemmo Paskiainen
Silver Snake Enterprise Against ALL Authorities
56
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 12:05:00 -
[20] - Quote
Aineko Macx wrote:Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:Aineko Macx wrote: The simplest solution to this would be to introduce some of the missing alchemy reactions. This would at least establish some bounds of mineral value relative to each other.
What do u mean by this? There is currently no alchemy reaction for Technetium. If one was introduced, people would do it as long as the input moon minerals and the cost of running the reaction is lower than of the resulting Tech. By doing so, the supply for Tech would increase, lowering it's market value, while the demand for the alchemy minerals would increase, raising their market value. Effectively, Tech would experience a soft upper value cap relative to the cost of the alchemy minerals and of running the reaction. Likewise, the alchemy reaction input minerals would experience a minimum value floor relative to the value of the resulting tech. This removes the Tech bottleneck as long as the alchemy input materials are not bottlenecked themselves. This is a simplification and there are some underlying assumptions, but that's basically it.
Soin short you are saying (im not native english). Replace the R32 componement in the T2 chain by and alchemy product that consists out multiple R32 or R64 or a combination. Pretty clever solution if u ask me. This way comes tech down, and other moon-¦s even out more.
Liam Mirren wrote:Honestly, scarcity and uneven distribution is a good thing as it creates things to fight over. Everything being similar and evenly good creates for a dull landscape. From that POV I agree to how it is atm; if you want something you'll have to take it, preferably from someone else. It's like the old T2 cartels and even though I I don't profit from it I approve as it's very much EVE.
The problem is Tech being AND amazingly profitable AND very localised in distribution. It's a bit too much.
I agree with you partly. R32-¦s and R64-¦s are worth fighting aslong as they have enough value. At the moment only Technetium is worth fighing over. I totaly agree with tech being bothleneck and being the most localised moongoo. CCP FIX BLACK OPS FFS |
|
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
504
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 12:11:00 -
[21] - Quote
Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:moon distribution in eve2x harvesting arrays on 1 moon, harvesting 200 per hour Monthy hours 30 days x 24 = 720 Current moon goo value *200 goo* 720 hours = profit a month Caesium..............2936,97*200*720 = 422.923.680 ISK Technetium...........100.975,76*200*720= 14.540.509.440 ISK Hafnium................1999,99*200*720= 287.998.560 ISK Mercury..................3779,63*200*720= 544.266.720 ISK Promethium.......5509,44*200*720= 793.359.360 ISK Dysprosium.......9698*200*720 = 1.396.512.000 ISK Neodymium.......20396,99*200*720= 2.937.166.560 ISK Thulium..............2426,84*200*720= 349.464.960 ISK #1. Technetium moons are the most centralised moons in EVE #2. The Regions in where Technetium is located forms a geographic island witch greatly benefits its defenders #3. A techitium cartel has been formed witch doesnt sell under 100,000 ISK p/u due reson #1 #4. The income compared to other R32 moons is so much more hugh that there need to be somthing broken #5. The hugh income from #3 & #1 has a too big effect on 0.0 politic situation. #6. After the T2 material change, T2 ships got more expensive whitchs has negative effect on pvp #7. The NIP between the Techcartel allows people to build tech funded supercapital production risk free #8. The unfair ISK income makes it unpossible to break the Tech Cartel #9. 1 R32 moon has 6 x more value than the most profitable R64 moon yet the R64 is more rare #10. Someone was sleeping the last T2 ship materiala got change #11. There must be something wrong if even the holders say the gain too much isk form the moons #12. 269 X 14,540 million = 3900,5 Billion isk go-¦s into 2-3 Allainces EACH MONTH Let The Trolling Begin!!
+1 for you
Some alliances do nothing to improve their market and so their production populace/corps/slaves other than make gazillions of isk every month they can never spend, directors of course have places of choice and produce the most expensive ships in game getting even richer etc etc.
Tech moons should just deplete like every harvested rock and spawn everywhere else in New eden, might that be in high sec, low sec or worm wholes. |
Tanya Powers
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
504
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 12:22:00 -
[22] - Quote
Aineko Macx wrote:Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:Aineko Macx wrote: The simplest solution to this would be to introduce some of the missing alchemy reactions. This would at least establish some bounds of mineral value relative to each other.
What do u mean by this? There is currently no alchemy reaction for Technetium. If one was introduced, people would do it as long as the input moon minerals and the cost of running the reaction is lower than of the resulting Tech. By doing so, the supply for Tech would increase, lowering it's market value, while the demand for the alchemy minerals would increase, raising their market value. Effectively, Tech would experience a soft upper value cap relative to the cost of the alchemy minerals and of running the reaction. Likewise, the alchemy reaction input minerals would experience a minimum value floor relative to the value of the resulting tech. This removes the Tech bottleneck as long as the alchemy input materials are not bottlenecked themselves. This is a simplification and there are some underlying assumptions, but that's basically it.
Well I'm sorry to tell you that you're wrong.
All they have to do is spot those sell orders, buy them and sell them at higher prices. Prices are fixed at 1000% over the lowest moon mat, do you think it's that easy to replace the milky cow?
You're forgetting those owners are cumulating hundreds (yes hundreds) of trillions isk per year. When you have that much isk what else can you do when you can buy whatever in game? - sell it for rl cash? |
Aineko Macx
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
35
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 12:24:00 -
[23] - Quote
People are exaggerating the stagnating effect more balanced R64 and R32 values would have. The individual moon would be less valuable, but there would be more valuable ones. And I never heard an alliance insist on having less valuable moons. There is always something more to fight for.
EDIT: lol @ poster above. |
Emoglee
Cataclysm Enterprises Ev0ke
5
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 12:38:00 -
[24] - Quote
I think we all can agree on the fact that tech definitely needs some tweaking, even the duders that are holding tech moons at the moment. Nevertheless tech shouldn't be nerfed into oblivion as it's one factor that generates fights. With the nerf of jump bridges and sanctums ccp ****** with 0.0 already, if they go on and nerf moon goo in general as well, there wont be any reason to live and fight in 0.0 space anymore.
In my opinion we just need to have the other moon mins like neo moons in the south balanced. |
Warzon3
Solar Storm The Forsaken.
10
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 15:07:00 -
[25] - Quote
add technetium to alchemy
while we are at it add all moon go to alchemy |
Krios Ahzek
Juvenis Iratus
337
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 15:13:00 -
[26] - Quote
Emoglee wrote:I think we all can agree on the fact that tech definitely needs some tweaking, even the duders that are holding tech moons at the moment. Nevertheless tech shouldn't be nerfed into oblivion as it's one factor that generates fights. With the nerf of jump bridges and sanctums ccp ****** with 0.0 already, if they go on and nerf moon goo in general as well, there wont be any reason to live and fight in 0.0 space anymore.
In my opinion we just need to have the other moon mins like neo moons in the south balanced.
If they magically changed the mineral distributions around so that everybody has equal amoutns of tech, then it would somewhat keep its value, but there would always be the possibility of invading your neighbor to double your tech moon count. Look upon my posts, ye mighty, and despair. |
Messoroz
AQUILA INC
83
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 15:23:00 -
[27] - Quote
AAA just mad that goons are going to get all the tech during their great russian genocide campaign. |
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum KUGUTSUMEN.
328
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 15:45:00 -
[28] - Quote
Why am I not surprised the OP is -A-.
As far as Moon goo goes. It wouldn't a bad idea to have moon mineral output dependent on artificial min/max value set by CCP to make it dynamic. Once value of said moon gets close to cap, moon output increases, and when value gets close to min, moon output decreases, Ofc this would still require the removal of bottle necks or a restructuring of t2 reqs. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
2126
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 15:50:00 -
[29] - Quote
Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:those 3900 billion isk pumped in the ecomoy devide trough 5b = 780 moons worth fighting over, tech issue solved, more stuff to fight over, cheaper pvp ships, problem fixed. Not a single ISK is being injected into the economy through moon mining btw. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
If not, contact Miss DSA to shed your wardecs. |
Brooks Puuntai
Nomadic Asylum KUGUTSUMEN.
328
|
Posted - 2011.12.20 15:55:00 -
[30] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Hemmo Paskiainen wrote:those 3900 billion isk pumped in the ecomoy devide trough 5b = 780 moons worth fighting over, tech issue solved, more stuff to fight over, cheaper pvp ships, problem fixed. Not a single ISK is being injected into the economy through moon mining btw.
Shh Tippa let him have his moment. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |