| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
vanBuskirk
Caldari
   |
Posted - 2007.08.28 09:33:00 -
[1]
The title says it. Some time in the future, the maximum reprocessing yield for modules is going to be 80%, to avoid the use of manufactured modules as mineral compressors.
OK so far. But what does this do to mission runners, who have the reprocessing of junk loot such as t1 armour hardeners and guns as a secondary (or tertiary) source of income? Level 4 will be particularly hard hit, as BS guns are quite common drops and have a lot of minerals in them - certainly way over the limit proposed for full reprocess.
Just wait for the database to fill up with market sell orders for junk loot, and also with people who keep hangars full of rubbish because they are unwilling to waste the value in these items.
This is yet another stealth nerf for mission running. It is also a nerf for tech 1 production; it's already hard enough to turn a profit on tech 1 modules that drop as loot - this change will make it impossible.
But, hey, what does CCP care about giving "carebears" (mission runners and industrialists) the shaft - again?
Never mind, two or three other space MMORPGs are coming soon.
----------------------------------------------
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."
|
Cadiz
Caldari
No Quarter.
Vae Victis.
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 09:36:00 -
[2]
It affects 0.0 ratters too; it's hardly just a "wahhh us poor lv4 runners" thing. I know tons of corps who run very extensive subsidized ship & module supply schemes primarily on refined scrap loot, and I'm sure they're not looking forward to a 20% cut in their supply.
------
Director, No Quarter
"There is no problem that cannot be solved by the judicious application of violence." |
Frances Ducoir
Bounty Hunter - Dark Legion
Curse Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 09:37:00 -
[3]
It will make minerals a bit more expensive, which will animate more ppl to mine.
Isnt that bad. Missions still yield enough. Mining needed a small boost.
(i'am not a miner btw)
|
Steve Hawkings
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 09:37:00 -
[4]
well tbh missions make too much anyway and ecourage solo play in a multiplayer game.
Im glad they are making the change.
and good louck with those other 2 or 3 space mmorpgs.
|
Rafein
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 09:46:00 -
[5]
1. level 4 mission runners make enough isk before looting.
2. This is a boost to carebears, just not the misison runners. Minerals prices will rise, so miners will be able to actually make decent profits. Finally, a profession in Empire that is viable other than missions.
3. It's not going in till Rev 3 anyway.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 09:52:00 -
[6]
The only bad thing is that it discurage mission looting while it incourage running missions only for the bounties, so increasing isk inflow.
|
Iyanah
Minmatar
Mining Munitions and Mayhem
R i s e
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 10:02:00 -
[7]
so empire mission runners get their MASSIVE incomes reigned in a little to be more comparable with people who aren't as big a bunch of carebears, and thus making the move into lowsec and 0.0 a little more appealing to some?
boo frikkin hoo. i rat in 0.0 as my primary income, and frankly i don't see this nerf as such a big deal. so i'll get less trit from refining all the junk i accumulate? meh. i still accumulate enough to build all the t1 stuff i ever need and still have some left over to sell, not to mention the salvage which is always nice to have.
mission runners get LP and they get the rewards, not to mention more bounties in any given time than a ratter due to the higher concentration of less powerful rats in a mission.
==========================================
Iy
please remember: I AM a sarcastic ******* and nothing i say has ever represented the thoughts or feelings of my corp, alliance, or anyone really. read |
Rafein
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 10:06:00 -
[8]
 Originally by: Iyanah
so empire mission runners get their MASSIVE incomes reigned in a little to be more comparable with people who aren't as big a bunch of carebears, and thus making the move into lowsec and 0.0 a little more appealing to some?
boo frikkin hoo. i rat in 0.0 as my primary income, and frankly i don't see this nerf as such a big deal. so i'll get less trit from refining all the junk i accumulate? meh. i still accumulate enough to build all the t1 stuff i ever need and still have some left over to sell, not to mention the salvage which is always nice to have.
mission runners get LP and they get the rewards, not to mention more bounties in any given time than a ratter due to the higher concentration of less powerful rats in a mission.
Actaully, no, mission runners are going to just not loot, so they can run mission faster, and actually make isk faster. Only times people will loot is if it's vs. a target that gives good salvage, like melted caps,
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 10:33:00 -
[9]
I hereby reiterate my disgust towards the lazy approach taken by CCP.
So, instead of eliminating compression (play around with mineral volumes and reprocessable item volumes), they just hit us with a flat 20% tax (no other way to put this) for every refine involving a module.
What's next, max 80% reprocessing on ships too ?
_
Complaint vs whine | Char creation guide | Stacknerfs explained |
Malcanis
High4Life
SMASH Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 10:41:00 -
[10]
Originally by: vanBuskirk
The title says it. Some time in the future, the maximum reprocessing yield for modules is going to be 80%, to avoid the use of manufactured modules as mineral compressors.
OK so far. But what does this do to mission runners, who have the reprocessing of junk loot such as t1 armour hardeners and guns as a secondary (or tertiary) source of income? Level 4 will be particularly hard hit, as BS guns are quite common drops and have a lot of minerals in them - certainly way over the limit proposed for full reprocess.
Just wait for the database to fill up with market sell orders for junk loot, and also with people who keep hangars full of rubbish because they are unwilling to waste the value in these items.
This is yet another stealth nerf for mission running. It is also a nerf for tech 1 production; it's already hard enough to turn a profit on tech 1 modules that drop as loot - this change will make it impossible.
But, hey, what does CCP care about giving "carebears" (mission runners and industrialists) the shaft - again?
Never mind, two or three other space MMORPGs are coming soon.
Well at the moment missioning and ratting are both far more lucrative than mining.
When I turned to L4 missions for income I was pretty shocked at how much minerals the rat loot produces.
I suppose CCP could start putting bounties on asteroids... 
CONCORD provide consequences, not safety; only you can do that. |
|
|
Ghaelsto Kakram
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 10:52:00 -
[11]
If it ain't broken nerf it!
By the way, who gets the other 20%.
The CONCORD retirement fund? |
Gaven Blands
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 10:52:00 -
[12]
So the op thinks that the majority of people run missions to gain minerals.
Interesting theory. I wonder if the sun will still rise in the morning. I suspect it will.
|
Patch86
Di-Tron Heavy Industries
Atlas Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 10:56:00 -
[13]
It would have been real painful back when we lived in rat space (now we live in the drone regions, so not a big deal). But our corp pretty much survived off of donated rat loot from 0.0 ratters, which we reprocessed. Wouldn't have been nice having our wallets hit by a 20% flat decrease.
Although I do think mineral compression does need fixing. If that really was the only way I'd support it...but theres got to be a better way than that.
--------
|
Shanur
Minmatar
Republic Military School
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 11:11:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Venkul Mul
The only bad thing is that it discurage mission looting while it incourage running missions only for the bounties, so increasing isk inflow.
And that is only a temporary situation. More money inflow than is destroyed by existing money sinks results in inflation of prices, making the sale of items (aquired by mining, missioning, ratting or salvaging) more profitable, making missioning less profitable, resulting in fewer people doing it. It's self regulating because greed will push many to whatever activity is the most profitable.
|
Steini OFSI
Gallente
Minigame
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 11:18:00 -
[15]
I run missions mostly atm, and for myself I find it silly how much ammount of minerals I'm getting by refining loot, there is no need for me to contact or interact with miners to get minerals needed for battleship production once I've reached the LP points for a faction ship and gonna build me one.
Personally I think this is a fair change and a boost to miners that is much needed and they deserve the boost of trade they'll recieve.
|
vanBuskirk
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 18:40:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Gaven Blands
So the op thinks that the majority of people run missions to gain minerals.
Interesting theory. I wonder if the sun will still rise in the morning. I suspect it will.
Nope. That I didn't say. However, I am quite sure that all I said will happen. Reprocessing junk loot is a useful source of extra income, to say nothing of mineral supplies if you are an industrialist as well - but I suspect that people don't like losing stuff, so will hoard and/or sell the junk loot instead thus depressing module prices.
Actually, I would be in favour of much less - but higher quality - loot.
----------------------------------------------
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."
|
Del Narveux
Dukes of Hazard
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 19:26:00 -
[17]
I dont see this as having a huge impact on L4s since honestly, while the loot minerals are nice the main income is from bounties and salvage. But it is going to *****T1 production even more than it already is since missioners will just collect gobs of modules and get in price wars since to them it will now be 'worth it' to sell them 20% below build cost. Good thing Im not an industrialist I guess, but GG CCP for nerfing yet another profession. 
_________________
[SAK] Alumnus--And Proud Of It! -- aka Cpt Bogus
Is that my torped sig cloaking your base?
Originally by: Wrangler
Well, at least we have forum PvP..
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 19:31:00 -
[18]
Originally by: Iyanah
so empire mission runners get their MASSIVE incomes reigned in a little to be more comparable with people who aren't as big a bunch of carebears, and thus making the move into lowsec and 0.0 a little more appealing to some?
boo frikkin hoo. i rat in 0.0 as my primary income, and frankly i don't see this nerf as such a big deal. so i'll get less trit from refining all the junk i accumulate? meh. i still accumulate enough to build all the t1 stuff i ever need and still have some left over to sell, not to mention the salvage which is always nice to have.
mission runners get LP and they get the rewards, not to mention more bounties in any given time than a ratter due to the higher concentration of less powerful rats in a mission.
Try to do a reality check before posting.
In a good ratting system in 0.0 you can do 30-50 million hour ratting for the bountyes alone, and get loot worth hundred of millions ofthen enough. No mission will even approach that.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 19:32:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Akita T
I hereby reiterate my disgust towards the lazy approach taken by CCP.
So, instead of eliminating compression (play around with mineral volumes and reprocessable item volumes), they just hit us with a flat 20% tax (no other way to put this) for every refine involving a module.
What's next, max 80% reprocessing on ships too ?
If all the items where put at a max compression of 5:1 what cargo size we would need to move items around?
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 19:38:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Shanur
Originally by: Venkul Mul
The only bad thing is that it discurage mission looting while it incourage running missions only for the bounties, so increasing isk inflow.
And that is only a temporary situation. More money inflow than is destroyed by existing money sinks results in inflation of prices, making the sale of items (aquired by mining, missioning, ratting or salvaging) more profitable, making missioning less profitable, resulting in fewer people doing it. It's self regulating because greed will push many to whatever activity is the most profitable.
The skill system in EVE make sure that it is not so simple.
If you are skilled in combat you go to mission or ratting to build cash. If you find you cash inflow is eaten by inflation you have 2 option: increase the pace of the activities you have already trained (and train to get even better at them) or change activity to one more lucrative.
But if you have low or no skill in building/mining /invention your return will be very low for months while you train the needed skills, so most of the people will instread train to get better at what they are already doing.
The number of people moving to other activities will be relatively small.
|
|
|
Shira Vibeke
Caldari
Tri Force
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 19:47:00 -
[21]
I'm not a miner but i have friends who are mining (or was mining will be better after mineral prices down).
Imho good change. Maybe miner will be now in better situation.
P.S. Upgrading mining yeld more and more will not resolve problem. Prices will go down more and miners will return to start point.
|
Derovius Vaden
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 19:55:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Derovius Vaden on 28/08/2007 19:55:17
Originally by: vanBuskirk
...secondary (or tertiary) source of income...
OH NOES! THEY CAN'T TAKE MY SECONDARY INCOME, HOW CAN A MAN LIVE ON HALF MILLION ISK BOUNTIES ALONE!
I'm a miner, I have one income, and glad to have that. In the words of fat chef:
|
Ker Ching
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 20:12:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Steve Hawkings
well tbh missions make too much anyway and ecourage solo play in a multiplayer game.
Yes, it's a multi-player game, but that doesn't mean it's compulsory to play in a group. Poker is a multi-player game too, but last time I played I was in a team of one with a personal aim.....just like I do in Eve.
Back on topic, yes, it's a mission nerf. Suck it up, roll with it, etc. It's just another one of many, and all the tears in the world won't change it.
Originally by: Sahwoolo Etoophie
Please stop posting threads. *click*
|
Eralus
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 20:13:00 -
[24]
Edited by: Eralus on 28/08/2007 20:20:16
CCP is being stupid, because this isn't even going to work.
Before:
Mine 1 billion in minerals. Manufacture it into a module. Transport module toe Empire. Recycle module. Sell one billion in minerals.
After (mineral prices have gone up):
Mine 1.25 billion in minerals. Manufacture it into a module. Transport module to Empire. Recycle module. Sell one billion in minerals.
Same damned difference.
What CCP fails to grasp is that a 20% reduction in yield from reprocessing just means it costs 20% of the shipment value to move it to empire. But if you cut out 20% of the production of minerals (20% lost on the way to empire, 20% lost on mission/rat loot), the prices just go up 20%, so you still get the same damned amount of isk for the same amount of work.
The REAL* problem is that CCP uses the same number for amount of minerals to manufacture an object and amount of minerals in the finished product that can be reprocessed back out. What needs to change is that each object needs a 'manufacturing waste' percentage. So if it takes 1,000m3 of minerals to manufacture an object, and the finished object is 1,000m3 big, then the waste percentage can be 0%. (Note, it doesn't have to be, as the finished product could be less dense and you could still have waste.) But if an object takes 500,000m3 of minerals to make, and the finished object is only 1,000m3 big, then the object gets a 98% manufacturing waste modifier - 98% of the materials you put in to manufacture the object get 'lost' in manufacturing.
Since only really expensive objects take massive volumes of minerals to manufacture (by definition), and you normally wouldn't thus reprocess them unless you're using them for transport, you can apply this modifier only to those objects and not **** up every other object in the game that can't be used for mineral compression.
Players are already willing to spend massive money researching blueprints, manufacturing the modules, and transporting them. Why does CCP think that if they just make it a bit more expensive that this is going to stop people from using mineral compression? Paying 20% for 430:1 compression is *STILL* worth it!
Don't change the reprocessing yield for ALL modules when it's only a few of them that are broken.
_____
Lifewire is a big, ugly, mean... carebear. |
Chainsaw Plankton
|
Posted - 2007.08.28 20:27:00 -
[25]
if mining was more fun then
wait 3 mins, drag to can, drag to hauler
repeat
then i really wouldn't mind doing it.
oh yes and does anyone actually do t1 production, other than people who are inventing/selling to inventors?
|
Block Ukx
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 19:16:00 -
[26]
Any idea on when is this nerf going to happen?
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 19:18:00 -
[27]
in a few months or dozen weeks
the fact is that it will increase mineral prices across all of eve and this will be exponential as you get into deep 0.0
so there will be some dynamic prices but misson runners will be the least affected
____ __ ________
_sig below_
devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
_lies above_
CCP Morpheus was here 
Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn
[yellow]Kaem |
Buyerr
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 19:27:00 -
[28]
Edited by: Buyerr on 04/09/2007 19:27:05
remove wracks from rats from highsec. greatly increase mission rewards.
|
Lowanaera
Amarr
Paladin Imperium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 19:49:00 -
[29]
Uh, only mission runners with no connection skills and poor missile/gunnery skills loot. I easily make 30m/hour from bounties/LP alone, 40m if I get a good streak of missions. That's with entirely T2 fit.
|
Judge Ment
Aeon Interstellar Conglomerate
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 20:05:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Lowanaera
Uh, only mission runners with no connection skills and poor missile/gunnery skills loot. I easily make 30m/hour from bounties/LP alone, 40m if I get a good streak of missions. That's with entirely T2 fit.
LOL: better do your math again!
|
|
|
Kerfira
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 20:17:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Kerfira on 04/09/2007 20:28:16
This is the whiney'est thread since the last thread about the compression nerf.....
Mission runners can make at least ~40m/hour in the right ship with good skills now (yes, I do that myself, in high-sec), and that amount has been BOOSTED by CCP at least three times during the last year:
1. Salvage added. This is a VERY significant addition to the value of loot gained from a mission.
2. Mission LP improvements. Huge addition of items to LP store mean higher average LP price. Not to mention the fact that faction items and hardwire implants are now much more available to make mission running faster.
3. Reduction of small ships in missions and more big ones added. The big ships are on a 'per ISK' basis much easier to kill than the multitudes of small ships they replace, and much easier to loot/salvage.
Before these changes, I could max. make ~25m/hour in the same ship (faction fitted CNR in case you're wondering).
Mission running NEEDS a nerf, since it simply out-competes any other activity in the game for ISK-making (trading aside), and this nerf doesn't go far enough....
Having the best general ISK-making activity in high-sec out-competing ratting and mining in 0.0 is bad for the game.....
I ran 2 L4 missions in high-sec earlier today. Took me about 50 minutes with looting (same character in salvage destroyer).
Earnings around 11k LP, 15m ISK, loot/salvage worth 10-20m ISK.....
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Kazuma Saruwatari
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 20:20:00 -
[32]
oh god no. Its hard enough for some casual gamers like me to eek out ISK from missions to make ends meet, and now reprocessing modules is getting a nerf?
Perfect work CCP, nerf something that isnt broken.
-
Odd Pod Out, a blog of EVE Online |
Lowanaera
Amarr
Paladin Imperium
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 20:25:00 -
[33]
Edited by: Lowanaera on 04/09/2007 20:26:58
Originally by: Judge Ment
Originally by: Lowanaera
Uh, only mission runners with no connection skills and poor missile/gunnery skills loot. I easily make 30m/hour from bounties/LP alone, 40m if I get a good streak of missions. That's with entirely T2 fit.
LOL: better do your math again!
My math is quite accurate. L4 Q20 agents in a 0.1 system, III in both appropriate connection skills, plowing through Amarr missions in a gank-fitted Abaddon with an alt in a tank-fitted Abaddon. 30m an hour no problem.
Similar things can be done with solo faction-fitted ships and high-sec agents. Looting simply isn't profitable if you're able to quickly do missions and accumulate large amounts of LP.
|
Howling Jinn
Kongsberg Vaapenfabrikk Amarr branch.
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 20:37:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Iyanah
so empire mission runners get their MASSIVE incomes reigned in a little to be more comparable with people who aren't as big a bunch of carebears, and thus making the move into lowsec and 0.0 a little more appealing to some?
boo frikkin hoo. i rat in 0.0 as my primary income, and frankly i don't see this nerf as such a big deal. so i'll get less trit from refining all the junk i accumulate? meh. i still accumulate enough to build all the t1 stuff i ever need and still have some left over to sell, not to mention the salvage which is always nice to have.
mission runners get LP and they get the rewards, not to mention more bounties in any given time than a ratter due to the higher concentration of less powerful rats in a mission.
1. you do know that mission rats have far less bounty?
2. you do know that 1 out of 3 npc's drop loot?
3. you do know that mission rats yield less salvage?
4. you do know that mining in 0.0 you can make 70m pr hour?
5. you do know that missions are way harder than any spawn you can find in 0.0?
6. if you cant make more isk pr hour than a high sec mission runner you are doing something very wrong. tripple 1.85 spawns are easy as pie. you do live in a region where there is alot very low true security. where commanders spawn all the time. not too mention hauler spawns dropping up to 100m trit.
|
Venkul Mul
Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 20:49:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Lowanaera
Edited by: Lowanaera on 04/09/2007 20:26:58
Originally by: Judge Ment
Originally by: Lowanaera
Uh, only mission runners with no connection skills and poor missile/gunnery skills loot. I easily make 30m/hour from bounties/LP alone, 40m if I get a good streak of missions. That's with entirely T2 fit.
LOL: better do your math again!
My math is quite accurate. L4 Q20 agents in a 0.1 system, III in both appropriate connection skills, plowing through Amarr missions in a gank-fitted Abaddon with an alt in a tank-fitted Abaddon. 30m an hour no problem.
Similar things can be done with solo faction-fitted ships and high-sec agents. Looting simply isn't profitable if you're able to quickly do missions and accumulate large amounts of LP.
2 characters, so it is 15 millionw/hour per character, not 30 million hour with one character.
|
Amateratsu
Caldari
Terra Incognita
Dark Matter Coalition
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 21:36:00 -
[36]
I thought they were only nerfing the specific modules used for compressing mins?
not all modules in the game?
least thats how i read the dev blog....
think i will read it again:)
|
Eno Ditziwt
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 22:05:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Howling Jinn
Originally by: Iyanah
so empire mission runners get their MASSIVE incomes reigned in a little to be more comparable with people who aren't as big a bunch of carebears, and thus making the move into lowsec and 0.0 a little more appealing to some?
boo frikkin hoo. i rat in 0.0 as my primary income, and frankly i don't see this nerf as such a big deal. so i'll get less trit from refining all the junk i accumulate? meh. i still accumulate enough to build all the t1 stuff i ever need and still have some left over to sell, not to mention the salvage which is always nice to have.
mission runners get LP and they get the rewards, not to mention more bounties in any given time than a ratter due to the higher concentration of less powerful rats in a mission.
1. you do know that mission rats have far less bounty?
*2. you do know that 1 out of 3 npc's drop loot?
3. you do know that mission rats yield less salvage?
4. you do know that mining in 0.0 you can make 70m pr hour?
5. you do know that missions are way harder than any spawn you can find in 0.0?
6. if you cant make more isk pr hour than a high sec mission runner you are doing something very wrong. tripple 1.85 spawns are easy as pie. you do live in a region where there is alot very low true security. where commanders spawn all the time. not too mention hauler spawns dropping up to 100m trit.
*Except Mordus, Drones, and Generic NPCs which have a drop rate pretty dammed close to 100%
|
Chainsaw Plankton
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 22:09:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Eralus
Edited by: Eralus on 28/08/2007 20:20:16
CCP is being stupid, because this isn't even going to work.
Before:
Mine 1 billion in minerals. Manufacture it into a module. Transport module toe Empire. Recycle module. Sell one billion in minerals.
After (mineral prices have gone up):
Mine 1.25 billion in minerals. Manufacture it into a module. Transport module to Empire. Recycle module. Sell one billion in minerals.
Same damned difference.
i thought it was the other way around, people were using this "compression" to move low ends out of empire?
because if its that way then get a rorqual and compress the ore and drop on an high sec gate and just industrial/freighter out of lowsec back into high sec.
|
Chenoa Gallente
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 22:36:00 -
[39]
Connection and all other soc skills are for noobs, real men won't waste any time on those useless timesink skills. |
Ticarus Hellbrandt
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 23:21:00 -
[40]
dang 20% loss in profits of my scrap loot reprocessing trade
|
|
|
The RepoMan
Caldari
Red Horizon Inc
Red Horizon
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 23:28:00 -
[41]
durrr... no **** sherlock. Might as well say 'Your proposed change of shooting every player in the face will hurt pretty people'. Congratulations you've figured it out, they obviously have it in for pretty people. Game changes are there to help the game, not you, get over yourself.
|
Rangkai
|
Posted - 2007.09.04 23:51:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Del Narveux
now be 'worth it' to sell them 20% below build cost.
This is an interesting point..
There isn't a lot of money in the t1 module market.. but some people do build these modules.. and it may be harder for them to compete
|
SiJira
|
Posted - 2007.09.05 07:48:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Rangkai
Originally by: Del Narveux
now be 'worth it' to sell them 20% below build cost.
This is an interesting point..
There isn't a lot of money in the t1 module market.. but some people do build these modules.. and it may be harder for them to compete
or a lot easier
____ __ ________
_sig below_
devs and gms cant modify my sig if they tried!
_lies above_
CCP Morpheus was here
Morpheus Fails. You need colors!! -Kaemonn
[yellow]Kaem |
Kastar
Memphis Technologies
|
Posted - 2007.09.05 07:51:00 -
[44]
Awesome idea. It'll be good for the miners again.
-----------------------------------------------
|
Falbala
Gallente
Les Enfants de Gaia
|
Posted - 2007.09.05 11:13:00 -
[45]
It's very good for mission runners and ratters! It's only bad for T1 module producers (generally newbies) because they can't say lets make 300 Expanded Cargohold I, if I don't sell them I can still reprocess them later and try something else. So ratters and mission runners get now the monopoly on T1 modules. Good job CCP.
Newbies have been taken out of researching, now they are taken out of producing.
|
Selena 001
|
Posted - 2007.09.05 11:37:00 -
[46]
So...
Will the mission runners start running to miners for their minerals, or just run 25% more missions to get what they need?
I think we all know the answer to that.
Look at it for what it is. Its a change to stop the exploitation of something by someone. I dont pretend to understand it. Stop trying to throw market dynamics at it to make it seem like a boost / nerf.
___________
NATIONAL SARCASM DAY!! |
Segge Bolled
Caldari
Agony Unleashed
Agony Empire
|
Posted - 2007.09.05 11:54:00 -
[47]
(While I'm sure this has already been covered, I still wish to express my own contempt.)
Originally by: vanBuskirk
... as a secondary (or tertiary) source of income? Level 4 will be particularly hard hit, as BS guns are quite common drops and have a lot of minerals in them - certainly way over the limit proposed for full reprocess.
Just wait for the database to fill up with market sell orders for junk loot, and also with people who keep hangars full of rubbish because they are unwilling to waste the value in these items.
1) Yes, secondary or tertiary source of income ...
2) Yes, I'm sure they'll be "unwilling to waste the value" of the modules when they're already refining them down anyway ...
|
vanBuskirk
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.09.05 13:29:00 -
[48]
Hmmm... "secondary or tertiary" may have been a poor choice of words. Maybe it should have been "less obvious or least obvious".
The most obvious income from a mission is the reward and bonus (if you can manage to get the latter). The second most obvious is the mission rat bounties - which sometimes doesn't apply, as in fighting drones or enemy Navy ships. The third most is loot and salvage.
Loot and salvage - well, salvage takes ages to get for one thing, especially with "generic" rats. OK, you can dump the metal scraps, but you've spent time getting them. Loot - well, t1 basic and low-end named are the most common. Low-end named loot is often barely worth putting on sale, and very often doesn't refine into much in the way of minerals. Basic tech 1 stuff is where some of the money currently is.
Typically, the mission reward is the smallest part of the income from missions, followed by bounties (or selling tags) and finally loot and salvage - in fact, on average, the value of the loot is probably about the same as the bounties. So a 20% reduction in the value of the loot translates to a 10% drop in income, roughly. Which is significant.
I stand by what I said earlier. The refining nerf will drop the price on the market of tech 1 rat-droppable loot to 20% less than build cost, because that's what the stuff will be worth. (In fact, it will probably be lower than that - because stuff is often on sale for less than build cost already, from runners who just want to get rid of it fast.) So making anything for sale at a profit, that happens to be sold by rats, will become impossible. This is already so for a lot of items - for example, I have a complete set of tech 1 afterburner and MWD researched BPOs in a can in my hangar, gathering dust - simply because you can't make money on making them.
My opinion? If CCP insist on nerfing compression, then along with it they will have to get rid of tech 1 junk loot from at least missions and maybe belt rats, and increase the drop rate of the good stuff to compensate. It would also be useful to know in advance whether wrecks are worth salvaging or not; there are more annoying things than "your salvaging attempt was successful, but there was nothing to salvage", but not many - yet another pointless CCP timesink. And if the rat has neither salvage nor loot, then just plain don't create a wreck - which would help the lag problem as well.
----------------------------------------------
"Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent."
|
Darth Felin
|
Posted - 2007.09.05 13:44:00 -
[49]
I am mission runner but still I think this nerf will not help in anything because IT IS TO WEAK. No equipment should be capable of "compressing" minerals. If it have volume of 100m3 that you should not be able to refine it to more that 100m3 of minerals. I can live with decreased income, but I am not miner to sell minerals.
P.S.
Maybe it will be better good also to leave only named stuff as loot because I did not know anyone except first-second day player who use many not named t1 equipment
|
Mister Xerox
|
Posted - 2007.09.05 13:55:00 -
[50]
Oh, boy boy boy are all of you people soooo wrong...
... 20% reduction in reprocessing yeild is going to hardly affect the market at all. It certainly won't raise the price of minerals. It's only going to bring in yet more macro miners/ratters/mission runners because the market will suddenly loose perhaps 10% of it's overall quantity, increasing macro miners by the same ammount to keep the quantities high.
And that new capital mining ship... won't be used for mining, that's for sure.
It's going to follow a carrier or BS around, parking 150+km from the belt as the ratter pops the rats, then tractor in the cans from 150km away completely safe and unmolested by either rats or pirates (new face enters local = cloak).
Yay for capital tractor beams...
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |