EVE Search - The most interesting line in the new Econ blog

All Channels

Market Discussions

The most interesting line in the new Econ blog

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]
Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Kitex Blacktag Test Labs	Posted - 2007.09.30 17:30:00 - [1] From Dr. E's new blog: Quote: It is a strong recommendation on behalf of the chairman of the economic board that price of shuttles, and other items which create artificial price barriers, be increased or other measures taken in order to avoid price caps on the market for minerals (and any other market for that matter). By far the most interesting part of the blog for me, though I did find it interesting overall as someone who mass-produces ships. Whether you agree with the recommendation or not, it does seem to indicate that Dr. E may be making some hugely influential recommendations after all, rather than just crunching numbers and reporting on them. Blacktag - Buy ships / Fittings / Drones / Ammo in BULK with Delivery!
jongalt	Posted - 2007.09.30 17:40:00 - [2] it's quite possible the dr. knows something none of the players know. that "something" is, of course, up for debate... -jg.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.09.30 17:45:00 - [3] Ah, yes, let's remove insurance (bottom basket price caps), NPC mineral buy orders (bottom individual mineral price caps) and each and every NPC-sold refineable item (weird combination of individual and agregated top caps for all minerals except morphite) ! That'll do the economy REAL GOOD ! Notice: your Sarcasm II is already Sarcasm. _ [CNVTF] is recruiting \| Char creation guide \| Stack-nerfing explained
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.09.30 17:56:00 - [4] Originally by: Akita T Edited by: Akita T on 30/09/2007 17:47:52 Ah, yes, let's remove insurance (bottom basket price caps), NPC mineral buy orders (bottom individual mineral price caps) and each and every NPC-sold refineable item (weird combination of individual and agregated top caps for all minerals except morphite) ! That'll do the economy REAL GOOD ! Notice: your Sarcasm II is already Sarcasm. On second thought... hell, why not ? Just for the heck of it, see what happends. X-Treme eXperiment !!! I'm all for it. Market destabilization means money. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.09.30 18:02:00 - [5] Originally by: Shadarle I'm all for it. Same here. I'm tired of all these newbs and trolls saying that us old timers cheat or keep them down. Let's remove all the "training wheels" and then we can really start showing them why we are at the top of the food chain. I've got nothing better to do than to destabilize the market for my own gain. And that's what the caps do, if none of you had noticed. They leave entry room for new blood. Without those caps... Do you sell gtc's? Then perhaps we can do a deal.
Kitex Blacktag Test Labs	Posted - 2007.09.30 18:06:00 - [6] The bottom basket price caps have never had any significant impact on the market. I don't believe he was suggesting that insurance would be screwed with. As for removing NPC refining "top caps", I'm all for it. Why should miners have to compete with an infinite supply of NPC minerals at fixed prices? (No, Im not a miner). NPC top caps are not a natural part of the market. Refinable NPC items in general are a drawback to the days when EVE's economy was not yet fully self-sufficient, and I highly doubt they were ever intended to be mineral price caps. Blacktag - Buy ships / Fittings / Drones / Ammo in BULK with Delivery!
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.09.30 18:26:00 - [7] In case ALL the top caps get removed (or set sufficiently high as to not interfere at all), care to speculate on the prices each individual mineral will go to ? First assume all the individual mineral bottom caps remain in place however (at 1/2 of base value). Then assume those bottom caps also get removed, and only the bottom "basket price" of insurance remains I'll kick off with Tritanium, at an estimated price of around 6.5 ISK per unit, the very least, quite possibly over 7 ISK per unit soon _ [CNVTF] is recruiting \| Char creation guide \| Stack-nerfing explained
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles Zzz	Posted - 2007.09.30 18:53:00 - [8] This is something I've sometimes wondered about as well. My view is that if all NPC-imposed caps on mineral prices were removed, then mineral prices would settle at the point where it would be just as profitable to mine (solo) as it is to do salvaging or level 4 missions. Numbers to follow when I have time... My research services Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant stats
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.09.30 19:12:00 - [9] That's where the 6.5-7 comes from _ [CNVTF] is recruiting \| Char creation guide \| Stack-nerfing explained
Kazuo Ishiguro House of Marbles Zzz	Posted - 2007.09.30 19:22:00 - [10] Originally by: Akita T That's where the 6.5-7 comes from That works for low-ends (ignoring hauler spawns), but for high-end minerals I think we need to look at the 0.0 equivalents- exploration and ratting. What's your guess there? My research services Spreadsheets: Top speed calculation - Halo Implant stats
Treelox Amarr Frontier Technologies	Posted - 2007.09.30 19:35:00 - [11] lets not forget how uncapped mineral prices will be of great benifit to the macro miner population, and I guess indirectly isk sellers. -- http://www./sigs/Treelox/sig.png [orange]signature removed (change the zombie gagging sig) - please email us (with the signature URL) if you want to know why - Pirlouit([email protected]
Sprzedawczyk	Posted - 2007.09.30 19:58:00 - [12] Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro Originally by: Akita T That's where the 6.5-7 comes from That works for low-ends (ignoring hauler spawns), but for high-end minerals I think we need to look at the 0.0 equivalents- exploration and ratting. What's your guess there? 500 for zyd and 900 for megacyte. Insurance is providing max cap for ships - noone will pay 250M for raven when insurance payout is 80M, so high end prices will have to cut down.
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.09.30 20:03:00 - [13] Originally by: Sprzedawczyk Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro Originally by: Akita T That's where the 6.5-7 comes from That works for low-ends (ignoring hauler spawns), but for high-end minerals I think we need to look at the 0.0 equivalents- exploration and ratting. What's your guess there? 500 for zyd and 900 for megacyte. Insurance is providing max cap for ships - noone will pay 250M for raven when insurance payout is 80M, so high end prices will have to cut down. This isn't exactly true. The reason high ends will drop is due to other dynamics, not insurance. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Ray McCormack hirr	Posted - 2007.09.30 20:13:00 - [14] Originally by: Sprzedawczyk noone will pay 250M for raven when insurance payout is 80M Which is also why no one paid 250m for a Cerberus. Oh wait... Ask me about Secured ISK Loans from the BMBE.
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.09.30 20:41:00 - [15] Originally by: Ray McCormack Originally by: Sprzedawczyk noone will pay 250M for raven when insurance payout is 80M Which is also why no one paid 250m for a Cerberus. Oh wait... The best part about Cerb's were that they were never all that hot. At least not for mission running, which is what a lot of people used em for. The Raven was always better. But a lot of people were overcome with the T2 factor. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Ray McCormack hirr	Posted - 2007.09.30 20:44:00 - [16] Originally by: Shadarle The best part about Cerb's were that they were never all that hot. At least not for mission running, which is what a lot of people used em for. The Raven was always better. But a lot of people were overcome with the T2 factor. Did the increased resists not make it better? Ask me about Secured ISK Loans from the BMBE.
Auri Hella The Graduates Brutally Clever Empire	Posted - 2007.09.30 20:47:00 - [17] Originally by: Ray McCormack Originally by: Shadarle The best part about Cerb's were that they were never all that hot. At least not for mission running, which is what a lot of people used em for. The Raven was always better. But a lot of people were overcome with the T2 factor. Did the increased resists not make it better? The tank might be better. I've not bothered to compare. However the loss of firepower compared to a Raven makes the process of running mission so much slower that I don't see why you'd want to use a Cerberus.
Zolcan Amarr Praetoria Shipyards	Posted - 2007.09.30 21:07:00 - [18] Quote: 'm tired of all these newbs and trolls saying that us old timers cheat or keep them down. Let's remove all the "training wheels" and then we can really start showing them why we are at the top of the food chain. I've got nothing better to do than to destabilize the market for my own gain. Damn Shar.... you're brutal! Zolcan PRAETORIA WEBPAGE
Ramblin Man Empyreum	Posted - 2007.09.30 21:09:00 - [19] People will pay what they have to, no question about that. As for removing the price caps, I'm all for it. You people are looking at macroers all wrong. The reason we have macro miners isn't because veldspar is valuable, but because it isn't. Ergo, no one is in competition with them and they can just macro their hearts away. Let the price of trit float, give them some player competition, and I'm guessing you'll see them having a much harder time of it.
Vrizuh Eve Defence Force Praesidium Libertatis	Posted - 2007.09.30 22:28:00 - [20] Originally by: Ramblin Man People will pay what they have to, no question about that. As for removing the price caps, I'm all for it. You people are looking at macroers all wrong. The reason we have macro miners isn't because veldspar is valuable, but because it isn't. Ergo, no one is in competition with them and they can just macro their hearts away. Let the price of trit float, give them some player competition, and I'm guessing you'll see them having a much harder time of it. What will be the overall effect of these changes on the competition between GTC & illegitimate isk sales? I'm not trying to make a point, I'm genuinely curious. Would 0.0 miners find little increase in profits, but empire farmers make enough profit that they can finally widen the gap between their sell price and the gtc sell price? I haven't done the numbers in a while, but I think it was like a US$10 difference before.
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.09.30 23:29:00 - [21] Originally by: Ramblin Man Let the price of trit float, give them some player competition, and I'm guessing you'll see them having a much harder time of it. I doubt if player competition can even remotely compete with Macro-er's. After all, I watched macro-er's kill the mining profession, low end, repeatedly. Every time low end mining starts becoming profitable... there they go sucking it dry. What I do hope is that with the supposed newer tools that CCP has created this will bring the macro-ers back out into the open thus getting them all banned over time. That would be nice but imho mostly wishful thinking. Still, it would be interesting to see if the doctor can help CCP make the market adjust according to global, or even regional, mineral prices. This would eliminate alot of artificiality in the market... making people have to work for their money. Work harder and/or smarter. I'm actually excited if this happens. This kind of environment shift is more throwback to an earlier Eve than many will remember. An Eve I miss not that the current Eve isn't a distinct improvement. Just too many "training wheels" for newbs and/or morons in place. New players need it and I concur with the choice. The morons profit from it and that makes me mad. Save the genepool, give a moron a chainsaw today! Do you sell gtc's? Then perhaps we can do a deal.
Hanoi Hana Mitsubishi Group	Posted - 2007.09.30 23:50:00 - [22] Edited by: Hanoi Hana on 30/09/2007 23:50:32 Originally by: Shar Tegral What I do hope is that with the supposed newer tools that CCP has created this will bring the macro-ers back out into the open thus getting them all banned over time. That would be nice but imho mostly wishful thinking. Does CCP really want to kick out the macro miners? Potential in-game market problems are possible, but with a cap on trit, there will always be cheaply available empire low-ends. This means the removal of macro-miners will have only a dampened effect on the in-game market. However, it's been said it's possible that CCP doesn't want to take the $$$ hit every month for not having new accounts and GTC cards purchased. How many macro-miners use trial accounts? I don't know the answer to this, but it's obviously important to the macro-miner problem. I wondered from the beginning if Dr. EyjoG was also brought on to help shed some private light to CCP Devs on macro-miner issues, and frankly, I find Dr. EyjoG's complete and utter silence on the matter strange enough to use italics.
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.10.01 00:31:00 - [23] Originally by: Ray McCormack Originally by: Shadarle The best part about Cerb's were that they were never all that hot. At least not for mission running, which is what a lot of people used em for. The Raven was always better. But a lot of people were overcome with the T2 factor. Did the increased resists not make it better? Nope. The tank on the Cerb was no better than a Raven's. In fact I believe it was a bit worse, but it has been 6 months since I've run the numbers. Tho they may still be in one of the links in my sig. I believe the Raven and Cerb had similar tanking ability, but only against Kin/Therm, against EM the Raven won hands down. It's the Nighthawk/Vulture that have ubertastic tanks. But when you compared damage the Cerb was WAY behind the Raven, even if the Raven only used heavy missiles (which was a good idea for level 3's for some players). I ran thousands of missions back in the day and the Raven > Cerb > Ferox imo. But now it goes Nighthawk > Drake > Raven > Cerb > Ferox for level 3's and CNR > Nighthawk > Raven > Drake for level 4's, the other two aren't worth using. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Toria Nynys Minmatar	Posted - 2007.10.01 05:31:00 - [24] In a totally free market (read: no insurance 'bottom' or NPC item 'top') all minerals would go into freefall. The suddenly higher PvP cost due to no insurance payout would restrict most PvP to frigates and cruisers. Older players with an industrial base providing a firehose of ISK could still fly t2 and larger ships. They are not the majority of the playerbase however. Vastly higher cost of suiciding would likewise not only reduce the demand for suicided ships but also increase safety of empire dwellers -- two pronged fork of less demand. Broke PvPers would return to the belts to shoot rocks or rats ensuring the mineral supply increases. IMO battleships would have to sell at around 20M a pop or less for them to be kerploded at anywhere near current rates without insurance. I'm sure you can do the math which follows.
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.10.01 06:49:00 - [25] Originally by: Toria Nynys In a totally free market (read: no insurance 'bottom' or NPC item 'top') all minerals would go into freefall. The suddenly higher PvP cost due to no insurance payout would restrict most PvP to frigates and cruisers. Older players with an industrial base providing a firehose of ISK could still fly t2 and larger ships. They are not the majority of the playerbase however. Vastly higher cost of suiciding would likewise not only reduce the demand for suicided ships but also increase safety of empire dwellers -- two pronged fork of less demand. Broke PvPers would return to the belts to shoot rocks or rats ensuring the mineral supply increases. IMO battleships would have to sell at around 20M a pop or less for them to be kerploded at anywhere near current rates without insurance. I'm sure you can do the math which follows. Even if I were to accept this scenario, which I don't, who cares? A massive deflation would be insanely profitable for people with massive amounts of money currently. ISK would be worth more, thus the rich get richer buying power wise. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.10.01 07:03:00 - [26] Here's my thoughts. In real life, mineral prices are uncapped, obviously. This makes lots of sense in an economy. If Mineral X becomes too costly, people will use a substitute that while ordinarily more expensive, now becomes more useful. Or, they'll use a more costly but higher yielding method of extracting Mineral X that is otherwise not economically viable. However, in EVE, things are different. All high-mineral items cost nearly the exact same proportion of minerals, and there is no way to substitute anything ever. Its also impossible to use "higher yield" mining methods; the only way to deal with price rises is to shift mining towards a specific mineral, which just means that highsec farmers will make even more ISK macro mining. Now, removing mineral price caps would work if mineral makeups of items and ships were changed. Imagine Megathrons used a lot more tritanium than Tempests? Perhaps this would yield to demand changing to fit the supply! Currently, demand tritanium is completely inelastic--no matter how high tritanium prices go, people will still need just as much of it. If one could make a choice as to what minerals used, even if just by choosing a different product, removing mineral price caps would be an option. In summary, without changing the current economy and manufacturing system considerably, removing mineral price caps would effect the economy quite negatively, since the minerals in short supply would rise in price quickly and all the others would collapse by comparison. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! (updated)
Eliza Hacklehaber	Posted - 2007.10.01 07:53:00 - [27] following on from you DS - why not have production requirements fluid - i.e 1 pyrite = 2 trit, so if you needed 1k trit to build something, you could substitute it with 500 pyr? That would balance out the minerals across the board and also give regional differences due to ore distribution in those regions. It means you would also get a lot more production being based in 0.0 as the need for mass quantities of low ends are reduced by those requirements being filled by high end minerals. Hell, why not make it similar to invention in the sense that you need to use a 'ore decryptor' or something similar in the production chain to convert the mineral req's? basic decryptors giving basic conversions, rare/ultra-rare decryptors giving slightly better ratio's? /end brainfart
Vrizuh Eve Defence Force Praesidium Libertatis	Posted - 2007.10.01 08:48:00 - [28] Oops, went I posed my question I obviously forgot about insurance. Perhaps then I should say, what will be the most valuable ore if min prices aren't max-capped? I had initially thought "Veldspar" as was replied, for the simple reason that you need so much of it, and in nearly every product. Plus the size of trit means there'll be logistics delays etc. But veldspar can be mined in empire. Surely the mission runners couldn't supply the entire highs demand alone? I really hope they release a new veld roid. Trit is such a goddamn pain to mine.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.10.01 08:56:00 - [29] Originally by: Vrizuh But veldspar can be mined in empire. Surely the mission runners couldn't supply the entire highs demand alone? The equilibrium is reached when income from Veldspar mining roughly equals the income from L4 mission-running. Besides, Veldspar amounts generated daily in belts is finite regardless of number of wannabe miners... ISK from bounties however, not capped. So, I might even go so far as to claim Veldspar mining (IF you can find any) might even be more profitable as highsec L4 mission running. _ Caldari N.V.T.F. is recruiting...
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.10.01 09:06:00 - [30] Posted this in the devblog comments too, but to be honest, I'd rather not go in that thread anymore One of the possible solutions. Worth a read though, thread initially started by Nyphur. If you want to remove ALL price caps, THIS is a must. _ Caldari N.V.T.F. is recruiting...
Meiers	Posted - 2007.10.01 10:21:00 - [31] Originally by: Treelox lets not forget how uncapped mineral prices will be of great benifit to the macro miner population, and I guess indirectly isk sellers. who cares, if trit prices ever get that high there will be plenty of money for everyone.
Ray McCormack hirr	Posted - 2007.10.01 10:29:00 - [32] Originally by: Meiers Originally by: Treelox lets not forget how uncapped mineral prices will be of great benifit to the macro miner population, and I guess indirectly isk sellers. who cares, if trit prices ever get that high there will be plenty of money for everyone. /lol if you're joking. /facepalm if you're serious. Ask me about Secured ISK Loans from the BMBE.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.10.01 10:37:00 - [33] /facepalm would be way too mild. Something involving retractable batons might be more appropriate. _ Caldari N.V.T.F. is recruiting...
Ricdic Caldari Corporate Research And Production Pty Ltd Zzz	Posted - 2007.10.01 11:58:00 - [34] Originally by: Meiers who cares, if trit prices ever get that high there will be plenty of money for everyone. Sorry but my mind just boggled right there Need Empire Research Slots. Click here
Tommy TenKreds Animal Mercantile Executive Animal.	Posted - 2007.10.01 12:56:00 - [35] Originally by: Akita T Notice: your Sarcasm II is already Sarcasm. Made me lol. Bandures > Tommy, you like a cowboy harry )
Cker Heel Interstellar Starbase Syndicate Operations Interstellar Starbase Syndicate	Posted - 2007.10.01 15:03:00 - [36] Originally by: Dark Shikari All high-mineral items cost nearly the exact same proportion of minerals, and there is no way to substitute anything ever. Why does that mean, of all the minerals, that Tritatium is the one that needs a tight cap? Prices of other minerals have gyrated wildly without dire effects on t1 production.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.10.01 18:01:00 - [37] Originally by: Cker Heel Originally by: Dark Shikari All high-mineral items cost nearly the exact same proportion of minerals, and there is no way to substitute anything ever. Why does that mean, of all the minerals, that Tritatium is the one that needs a tight cap? Prices of other minerals have gyrated wildly without dire effects on t1 production. Yes, but the other minerals were still price limited! Tritanium isn't the only one. The whole point is that if a mineral rises in price, the demand for that mineral doesn't change one iota. Therefore price can rise and fall without limit if there are no price caps. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! (updated)
Sphynx Stormlord Gallente Anqara Tech	Posted - 2007.10.01 18:45:00 - [38] Quote: Besides, Veldspar amounts generated daily in belts is finite regardless of number of wannabe miners... ISK from bounties however, not capped. While the amount in belts is finite, LOTS of missions have veldspar. And missions are generated as and when the player wants.
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.10.01 18:56:00 - [39] Originally by: Dark Shikari Originally by: Cker Heel Originally by: Dark Shikari All high-mineral items cost nearly the exact same proportion of minerals, and there is no way to substitute anything ever. Why does that mean, of all the minerals, that Tritatium is the one that needs a tight cap? Prices of other minerals have gyrated wildly without dire effects on t1 production. Yes, but the other minerals were still price limited! Tritanium isn't the only one. The whole point is that if a mineral rises in price, the demand for that mineral doesn't change one iota. Therefore price can rise and fall without limit if there are no price caps. Just want to point out that Capital Ships have a different makeup of minerals than most other items do, so it is not 100% accurate to say all items are composed of the same ratios of minerals. The increased Capital production is one reason trit has been in such high demand. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Dretzle Omega Caldari Psychedelic Party Stellar Economy Experts	Posted - 2007.10.01 19:31:00 - [40] Originally by: Dark Shikari The whole point is that if a mineral rises in price, the demand for that mineral doesn't change one iota. Therefore price can rise and fall without limit if there are no price caps. Not true. I wonder how many people on these forums actually took economics in school. The price of an item is determined by supply and demand. The supply and demand for a particular item can be mapped out on a graph based on amount and price (amount being the x line of the graph, price being the y line). Supply and demand would be graphed out separately, one line for each. As supply for an item would increase, the price would decrease; as demand for an item would increase, the price would increase. Where the supply line and the demand line meet would usually be where the price stabilizes, I believe. As such a graph would show, the demand for an item would be influenced by the price (or the price by the demand). If high caps were removed for minerals, you would see market fluctuation, but not to crazy amounts. So if Tritanium did become high enough in price, miners would switch to mining Tritanium (or if you can get it from refines, the Tritanium would be what was sold). As the supply of Tritanium increased, the price would decrease. Since everyone is mining Tritanium, the price of high end minerals gets more expensive. Since the price of high end minerals is more expensive, people start mining for high ends more, increasing the supply of those minerals, thereby decreasing the price of the high ends and people shift back to Tritanium. The fluctuation works on the PvP side, as well. If high end minerals are expensive, people start to PvP more often in Frigates or other ships that requires less of high end minerals. The demand for the high end minerals would drop, therefore their price would also drop. As the price drops, people notice this and start buying and PvPing more in ships that require more of the high end minerals, increasing their demand and thereby increasing the price. The thing that doesn't change is not the amount of demand of Tritanium, but that people always need Tritanium. This situation is just like the real world. No matter what fancy alloys and whatnot you want to use, iron is pretty basic in our world (well, silicon, too :) ). So you always have people mining more ore to make iron. They always have a job. In Eve, the Tritanium miners don't always have a job because many players would rather just get their Trit from refining loot drops. ------------------- 4 8 15 16 23 42 108
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.10.01 19:41:00 - [41] Edited by: Dark Shikari on 01/10/2007 19:46:02 Originally by: Dretzle Omega Originally by: Dark Shikari The whole point is that if a mineral rises in price, the demand for that mineral doesn't change one iota. Therefore price can rise and fall without limit if there are no price caps. Not true. I wonder how many people on these forums actually took economics in school. I definitely did, and you are wrong. Tritanium, like all minerals, is extremely price-inelastic--you'd have to raise its price a huge amount in order to lower demand. The reason for this is simple: the demand curve is based on the price of the total mineral cost of the average item that uses tritanium (since producers cannot choose to not use tritanium), while the supply curve is based off of the price of tritanium only. It isn't 100% price inelastic, but its close to it. Raising the price of tritanium by 100% is not going to lower demand by a considerable amount. You'd have to jack it up quite a lot more before demand started to fall. Your one correct point is that higher prices of tritanium would cause more people to mine it, but this isn't entirely true; people who don't like mining aren't going to start mining, and people in 0.0 aren't going to switch to mining veldspar either unless it becomes more profitable than arkanor. IMO the demand for tritanium is too high for supply to easily compensate. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! (updated)
Dretzle Omega Caldari Psychedelic Party Stellar Economy Experts	Posted - 2007.10.01 20:09:00 - [42] Originally by: Dark Shikari Your one correct point is that higher prices of tritanium would cause more people to mine it, but this isn't entirely true; people who don't like mining aren't going to start mining, and people in 0.0 aren't going to switch to mining veldspar either unless it becomes more profitable than arkanor. IMO the demand for tritanium is too high for supply to easily compensate. I should have put in that, where demand doesn't change, supply will. This would involve miners to mine more of the highly demanded mineral and, if high enough, non-miners pitching in. But you're right, the one thing I wasn't considering is that people who just don't like mining, as this is a game and people will usually only do what they find entertaining, won't start increasing the supply. In RL, though, when prices get high enough, the market does start to compensate by an increase in the number of suppliers. ------------------- 4 8 15 16 23 42 108
SencneS Amarr Balsarferskratchin Inc Axiom Empire	Posted - 2007.10.01 20:44:00 - [43] I can see so many positives and negatives for a price cap-less market.. Although the theories are sound - if you look at Moon material, there is only 1 place to get a few of the component parts in Probes which does limit the prices on some items. Most have a pretty controlled market. like the _Carbide market this could be wildly out of control but it isn't. There is still a level to which people will buy and sell items for and what their time is worth. Check this out. Titanium Carbide jumps up and down often but on a whole it's always reasonably price. What factors are made up of this. POS Operations - How much does it cost to keep the POS mining. Moving Logistics - How much does it cost to move that stuff around. Personal Profit - How much are you willing to make. POS Operations is great, since it has NCP and Player supplied parts, So really price of Titanium Carbide is at the will of the ICE miners prices. Always remember if you mine your own ICE to run a Moon mining POS you're prices are still controlled by the ICE Miners. The reason is, just because you say "Oh I'll make a 10% profit" doesn't mean everyone else will say, I want a 5% or what is better for you, their 10% profit is 100% more then your cost. Point is, if it costs Joe 75p/u to mine Titanium because he buys all his fuel from a ICE Miner, you're going to be priced at 74.99, you're not going to say.. meh, 45 is good enough for me. So even though you are making mad profit you price is loosely based on what ICE Miners determine their ICE is valued at even if you don't buy any ICE. Since the POS Fuels have no NCP equivalent I can't imagine Trit going much higher then say 4-5. The simple reason is people WILL mine trit and sell it for 3.99 just because they believe they are making huge profit. I think you'll be surprised just how little of an impact would have and cap-less minerals are already in the game. What cap-less prices DO allow is much MUCH easier market manipulation. We see it all the time with the _carbides but it only lasts a week or two then stabilizes back again. Amarr for Life
Danari Amarr Viper Squad Triumvirate.	Posted - 2007.10.01 23:03:00 - [44] I see absolutely no cause for concern. Yes it is true that demand for any one mineral, and for the aggregate of minerals, is inelastic. What is elastic, however, is the behavior of the miners, based primarily on isk potential and risk management. Evegeek tells me that all of the ores found in empire pay out in the neighborhood of 2+mil per jet can. All of the ores mined in 0.0 pay in the neighborhood of 4+mil per jet can. My miner friends watch the per-can payouts closely, and they indeed switch their mining focus to the roids that pay better, ie highly efficient elasticity in supply. The only real issue then is the relative profitability of empire vs. 0.0 mining, an issue that disinterests me given that at the end of each day a raven is going to cost within a few points of 80mil to produce.
Dark Shikari Caldari Imperium Technologies Firmus Ixion	Posted - 2007.10.01 23:56:00 - [45] Originally by: Dretzle Omega Originally by: Dark Shikari Your one correct point is that higher prices of tritanium would cause more people to mine it, but this isn't entirely true; people who don't like mining aren't going to start mining, and people in 0.0 aren't going to switch to mining veldspar either unless it becomes more profitable than arkanor. IMO the demand for tritanium is too high for supply to easily compensate. I should have put in that, where demand doesn't change, supply will. This would involve miners to mine more of the highly demanded mineral and, if high enough, non-miners pitching in. But you're right, the one thing I wasn't considering is that people who just don't like mining, as this is a game and people will usually only do what they find entertaining, won't start increasing the supply. In RL, though, when prices get high enough, the market does start to compensate by an increase in the number of suppliers. Yup, agreed; the problem with our economist is that he's approaching the problem from a real-life perspective without enough in-game experience to realize why real-life methods can't always be applied to a game. 23 Member EVE Video makers: save bandwidth! Use the H.264 AutoEncoder! (updated)
Rhiraven	Posted - 2007.10.02 00:04:00 - [46] Originally by: Shar Tegral Originally by: Shadarle I'm all for it. Same here. I'm tired of all these newbs and trolls saying that us old timers cheat or keep them down. Let's remove all the "training wheels" and then we can really start showing them why we are at the top of the food chain. I've got nothing better to do than to destabilize the market for my own gain. And that's what the caps do, if none of you had noticed. They leave entry room for new blood. Without those caps... Hey some of us young blood will be able to keep up, you know
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.10.02 00:14:00 - [47] Originally by: Rhiraven Hey some of us young blood will be able to keep up, you know Yes, I do know. I look forward to meeting them too. It would be a refreshing change from the run of the mill yap-yap at your betters kind of market scum that generally likes to announce themselves around here. BTW That's not saying you are one of them. Just I would love for some serious changes to be made just so there can be the weeding out of the men from the boys so to speak. I tire of people who haven't been there and done that acting as having been there and doing that doesn't matter. Essentially I want those virgins to get screwed, screwed well and hard, so that they can finally stop talking about stuff they don't know ** about. Do you sell gtc's? Then perhaps we can do a deal.**
Rhiraven	Posted - 2007.10.02 02:15:00 - [48] I haven't seen too much of that. A lot of 'hey send me isk lol' people, but not too many people talking **** just to do it. I was particularly surprised at how much information there was to find on this forum and how difficult it was to find it. I stumbled through the first three weeks of the game trying to make heads or tails of the market, and it really looked like you guys were suppressing information to stifle competition for awhile. After my little IPO attempt and some constructive criticism from guys like Ricdic and Grumpie I've realized that's not the case at all. You should chill a little to the new guys though, it really DOES look like there's a "Good Old Boys" club in here on the surface.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.10.02 03:06:00 - [49] Edited by: Akita T on 02/10/2007 03:12:16 Originally by: Dark Shikari Yup, agreed; the problem with our economist is that he's approaching the problem from a real-life perspective without enough in-game experience to realize why real-life methods can't always be applied verbatim to a game. Fixed that for you Originally by: Rhiraven You should chill a little to the new guys though, it really DOES look like there's a "Good Old Boys" club in here on the surface. "Looks" being the operative word here. I haven't been very active in the market forum (compare posts here vs posts anywhere else), and I've made my fair share of controversial (at that time) statements/analyses. What I quickly observed is that there's absolutely no "united front" whatsoever when it comes to cold hard profit potential, it's just "every man for himself". There is a sort of "mutual respect" between the regulars however, and you don't smacktalk THEM if you're a regular yourself unless you have a good reason to (they just had a brainfart)... on the contrary, regulars do jump on newcomer's throats immediately, and only back off when confronted with undeniable facts and reasoning. The reason's simple... talk crap, you get verbally spanked. You tend to not yap nonsense at people that spanked you in the past Sounds like a more than healthy place to be, if you ask me. _ Caldari N.V.T.F. is recruiting...
Benvie	Posted - 2007.10.02 03:19:00 - [50] Edited by: Benvie on 02/10/2007 03:19:20 There is most definitely a feel of an "old boys club" in here and new people have a tendency to get smacked around. However, if that's what it takes to keep out the general stupidity that plagues most of the other boards on this forum, then I'm all for it.
Shar Tegral	Posted - 2007.10.02 03:59:00 - [51] Originally by: Rhiraven You should chill a little to the new guys though, it really DOES look like there's a "Good Old Boys" club in here on the surface. This is where I do the word replacement thing that helps others to understand what is really going on. It is not the "Good Old Boys" club is it the "Best Known People" club. You could be nothing more than an alt for DragonRiderTao trying an alternative method of scamming (via your ipo effort) and currently just doing your best to sabotage the apparent confidence in the "Best Known People" club by alluding to some sort of collusion amongst the parties. Pure supposition here btw but you have to realize that this is actually the kind of lame ass crap that is so often attempted around these forums. Repeatedly. I should point out that it is not "Best Known" as in some sort of popularity contest... because that being the case I would not be one of those so readily seen as being in the "club". No, best known is simply people who have consistently remained active via the name you see in front of you. This activity ranges from here to ingame. It ranges from markets, to financials, to wars, etc., etc.. If Ray had a problem with me, specifically, he knows he actually could eve mail and work it out. That I'm not so forum alt who is only seen when trouble is started. That if need be I could join his corp/alliance and man some guns as well, if our relationship was of that nature. People only work with people they know. Which is why it may seem like a good old boy club but you won't find most of the membership patting each other on the back with any camaraderie. It's just that we know that there are those who are real and worth listening to, that there are those who are most likely crap-alts not worth listening to, and everyone else. The trouble is that everyone else could also be crap alts too. So until you prove yourself worth listening to you won't be listened to pretty much. Don't *** at us about it... thank every lowlife alt scammer/poster that's abuse(d/s) these boards. Originally by:** Benvie However, if that's what it takes to keep out the general stupidity that plagues most of the other boards on this forum, then I'm all for it. Said it better than I did. Hoorah! Do you sell gtc's? Then perhaps we can do a deal.
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.10.02 04:24:00 - [52] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Rhiraven You should chill a little to the new guys though, it really DOES look like there's a "Good Old Boys" club in here on the surface. "Looks" being the operative word here. I haven't been very active in the market forum (compare posts here vs posts anywhere else), and I've made my fair share of controversial (at that time) statements/analyses. What I quickly observed is that there's absolutely no "united front" whatsoever when it comes to cold hard profit potential, it's just "every man for himself". There is a sort of "mutual respect" between the regulars however, and you don't smacktalk THEM if you're a regular yourself unless you have a good reason to (they just had a brainfart)... on the contrary, regulars do jump on newcomer's throats immediately, and only back off when confronted with undeniable facts and reasoning. The reason's simple... talk crap, you get verbally spanked. You tend to not yap nonsense at people that spanked you in the past Sounds like a more than healthy place to be, if you ask me. Sums it up pretty well. I can't speak for other people here, but not all the "good old boys" here even know each other. Not more than reading their posts on this forum that is. I personally don't chat with anyone from this forum in game other than a very rare message I may receive. I just like reading the forums to keep up on the game and the market. The people who get slammed on this forum are those who make illogical, stupid, uninformed, greedy, lazy or otherwise annoying posts. Those who are known as successful traders, prove themselves as smart economists, make amusing/memorable posts, or otherwise show themselves to be intelligent are given a smidgen of respect or at least are not judged so harshly every time they post. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Ramblin Man Empyreum	Posted - 2007.10.02 04:58:00 - [53] A note, there was a very cogent point made elsewhere about the removal of npc-supplied trit being a removal of a hefty ISK sink as well, so there may indeed be enough money for us to all eventually buy 6 ISK trit. As for the various merits and problems with a free-floating mineral market, I see no particular reason why Veldspar should be the most valuable ore to mine in a free-market future. If all belts are changed to dynamic spawns through scanning instead of static locations, then ore spawning proportions can easily be adjusted on the fly as the market mutates. Furthermore, +5%/+10% named ore abundance can be used to adjust things with an even finer grain. Then, it's simply a matter of tweaking the mining crystal values per ore type to correspond more closely with the ratios demanded by the market. The end result, ofc, is that the differences in ISK/minute between different ore types will shrink. However, were we currently on the other side of this debate, I'm firmly convinced half of you would be bemoaning how price-stabilizing the mineral market would make Scordite 'disappear' (egad! imagine the horrors!). They're simply two different choices, and I, for one, favor a solution which gives players, and traders, more control over their economy -- NPC price controls are CONCORD for mineral traders. So unless anyone can point out a systemic, insurmountable flaw that a free market would introduce in the game, there really isn't a reason against making the transition. It's simply a choice. And I, for one, choose player freedom.
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.10.02 06:09:00 - [54] I personally think Insurance should be reworked to pay out about 10-20% less than it does currently. This would more than compensate for the ISK-sink that was NPC refinable items. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.10.02 07:05:00 - [55] Right now insurance is from... default (no cost) : 40% of base ... platinum (30% of base) : 100% of base (70% back) How about... default (no cost) : 5% (yes, just some token return) 5% cost : 35% pay (30% back) ... 35% cost : 100% pay (65% back) _ Caldari N.V.T.F. is recruiting...
Rhiraven Gallente Exa Nation	Posted - 2007.10.02 13:35:00 - [56] Originally by: Shar Tegral People only work with people they know. Which is why it may seem like a good old boy club but you won't find most of the membership patting each other on the back with any camaraderie. It's just that we know that there are those who are real and worth listening to, that there are those who are most likely crap-alts not worth listening to, and everyone else. The trouble is that everyone else could also be crap alts too. Perhaps you neglected to read the part of my thread in which I said that there doesn't seem to be that kind of thing going on, in reality, it's just an illusion that people new to the forums will inevitably see. I said this so that you might stop wasting forum space trolling about it. Quote: You could be nothing more than an alt for DragonRiderTao trying an alternative method of scamming (via your ipo effort) and currently just doing your best to sabotage the apparent confidence in the "Best Known People" club by alluding to some sort of collusion amongst the parties. Thanks for asking, my revised IPO is doing fine now and I'm in a private agreement with Ricdic returning 7% daily dividends on his investment. Quote: So until you prove yourself worth listening to you won't be listened to pretty much. Don't ***** at us about it... thank every lowlife alt scammer/poster that's abuse(d/s) these boards. I don't recall being ignored by anyone. Quite the contrary, actually. You might just be full of yourself. -
Hugh Ruka Caldari Free Traders	Posted - 2007.10.02 14:03:00 - [57] Well this is quite fun. Only thing I can see, is that the price of highend minerals would go down in that case. Just imagine a battleship that needs about 8m trit. The trit price will shoot up to 5-6 or so causing the ship price to go up by around 16-24m. To cut the price down highends will be bought at lower prices, because generaly it is faster to mine the needed highends than to mine tritanium. You can get the needed megacyte in about 1-2 jetcans of arkonor, while you get something around 800k tritanium from one jetcan of veldspar. So the isk/time ratio will again shift towards lowends. The supply/demand is irrelevant if the limiting factor is online time, which is not elastic. You cannot escape the tritanium need (i.e. there is no substitute). Today if you make enough profit on highends, you can swallow the shuttle tritanium price. But if that changes, you need to take what the miners dictate. You are paying their time. Originally by: Aravel Thon Originally by: Nith Batoxxx Hi my alt just leanred to fly the ferox............... I am so so terribly sorry...
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.10.02 14:40:00 - [58] Originally by: Hugh Ruka Well this is quite fun. Only thing I can see, is that the price of highend minerals would go down in that case. Just imagine a battleship that needs about 8m trit. The trit price will shoot up to 5-6 or so causing the ship price to go up by around 16-24m. To cut the price down highends will be bought at lower prices, because generaly it is faster to mine the needed highends than to mine tritanium. You can get the needed megacyte in about 1-2 jetcans of arkonor, while you get something around 800k tritanium from one jetcan of veldspar. So the isk/time ratio will again shift towards lowends. The supply/demand is irrelevant if the limiting factor is online time, which is not elastic. You cannot escape the tritanium need (i.e. there is no substitute). Today if you make enough profit on highends, you can swallow the shuttle tritanium price. But if that changes, you need to take what the miners dictate. You are paying their time. Mineral pricing for dummies ! \o/ And no, it's not an insult, I meant it as a compliment. It's much harder to explain something in terms a newbie would understand. Of course, there's also the issue of mission loot repro in highsec, but that BOOSTS trit prices and lowers highend prices even more, so its not an issue ; then, there's hauler spawns in 0.0, but that again is more of a bonus than anything else, you still make shedloads more mining arkonor or somesuch, normally, unless trit prices more than explode. So yeah, a very simplified and very accurate description quoted. _ Caldari N.V.T.F. is recruiting...
Hugh Ruka Caldari Free Traders	Posted - 2007.10.02 19:41:00 - [59] Originally by: Akita T Originally by: Hugh Ruka Well this is quite fun. Only thing I can see, is that the price of highend minerals would go down in that case. Just imagine a battleship that needs about 8m trit. The trit price will shoot up to 5-6 or so causing the ship price to go up by around 16-24m. To cut the price down highends will be bought at lower prices, because generaly it is faster to mine the needed highends than to mine tritanium. You can get the needed megacyte in about 1-2 jetcans of arkonor, while you get something around 800k tritanium from one jetcan of veldspar. So the isk/time ratio will again shift towards lowends. The supply/demand is irrelevant if the limiting factor is online time, which is not elastic. You cannot escape the tritanium need (i.e. there is no substitute). Today if you make enough profit on highends, you can swallow the shuttle tritanium price. But if that changes, you need to take what the miners dictate. You are paying their time. Mineral pricing for dummies ! \o/ And no, it's not an insult, I meant it as a compliment. It's much harder to explain something in terms a newbie would understand. Of course, there's also the issue of mission loot repro in highsec, but that BOOSTS trit prices and lowers highend prices even more, so its not an issue ; then, there's hauler spawns in 0.0, but that again is more of a bonus than anything else, you still make shedloads more mining arkonor or somesuch, normally, unless trit prices more than explode. So yeah, a very simplified and very accurate description quoted. you mean I got it right ? thanks (or sorry in case I didn't :-)) I did not include repro loot, because usualy mission runners/ratters will sell at the actual best price they can get. they are normaly interested in profit, so they will go with any price there is at the market (I know, I did that too :-)). So their influence on price of minerals is minimal if not non-existent. Originally by: Aravel Thon Originally by: Nith Batoxxx Hi my alt just leanred to fly the ferox............... I am so so terribly sorry...
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.10.02 21:38:00 - [60] Taken from Starbase&stuff forum, on the issue of anchored POS structures taking too long to kill after the tower is down... Originally by: CCP Chronotis Its already been put in for kali 3, the HP reduced and the bonus from the tower increased to 0.99. The intention is also to unanchor all structures after the control tower is destroyed. ANOTHER ISK sink down the drain... Not that I don't love the "to the victor go the spoils" idea, but still... Combine that with the "reprocess shuttles for tritanium" ISK sink possibly going away... Runaway inflation, anybody ? _ Caldari N.V.T.F. is recruiting...
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.10.02 23:29:00 - [61] Oh, and by the way... you DO know that even the 3.6 "top cap" via shuttles is not the ACTUAL top cap, don't you ? NPC prices fluctuate too. Sure, they reset often, but still... not all THAT often so you can get potentially endless trit at 3.6 ISK. So, the "current system" tritanium top cap is a bit above 3.6... not sure quite how much higher, but higher than that for sure. _ Caldari N.V.T.F. is recruiting...
Hads Snappingturtle	Posted - 2007.10.03 04:47:00 - [62] How about they just double the amount of trit in every ore?
SencneS Amarr Balsarferskratchin Inc Axiom Empire	Posted - 2007.10.03 14:59:00 - [63] All I know is the second they start to talk about removing caps on Trit I'm buying as many shuttles and process them all as much as I can. After all in a Core Complexion Station you can have 1,471,640,000 Trit in a simple order of Shuttles (About 5bil ISK worth, and assuming you have perfect reprocessing skills and 0% Tax.) Amarr for Life
Hugh Ruka Caldari Free Traders	Posted - 2007.10.04 11:56:00 - [64] Originally by: SencneS All I know is the second they start to talk about removing caps on Trit I'm buying as many shuttles and process them all as much as I can. After all in a Core Complexion Station you can have 1,471,640,000 Trit in a simple order of Shuttles (About 5bil ISK worth, and assuming you have perfect reprocessing skills and 0% Tax.) This is the reason they will NOT announce it and we will discover after patch day that there was a stealth nerf. If I knew such a change is comming, I'll be sitting on HEAPS of trit on patch day and waiting for prices to rise. Originally by: Aravel Thon Originally by: Nith Batoxxx Hi my alt just leanred to fly the ferox............... I am so so terribly sorry...
Shadarle	Posted - 2007.10.04 13:36:00 - [65] Originally by: Akita T Right now insurance is from... default (no cost) : 40% of base ... platinum (30% of base) : 100% of base (70% back) How about... default (no cost) : 5% (yes, just some token return) 5% cost : 35% pay (30% back) ... 35% cost : 100% pay (65% back) I could definitely live with this. It would at least require people to buy insurance. Personally I never buy insurance because I never lose ships. I've lost 2 valuable ships in my entire time in EVE and I have 10+ that are worth insuring. I'd be losing money if I wasted time insuring them. Tanking Setups Compared Stacking Penalty / Resists Explained
Sharra Savente Shai'tan's Elite Zzz	Posted - 2007.10.04 13:52:00 - [66] It simply won't work without a massive nerf to reprocesssing. That would mean, missioners would stop reprocessing, and start selling modules. No more reason to manufacture any of those types of modules. Those same missioners would not then be building ships from BPCs with those same free mins. They would buy them with cash from modules. Bigger demand for ships, almost no demand for fits. Of course, with mins and ships costing so much more, who the hell will want to get popped in PvP?? Oh no, my insurance payout is gonna be 1/3 what I paid, eee***! They'll have to drop NPC sold ships too. You can buy frigates in any hi-sec empire space from NPCs. Not just shuttles, frigates too. Way to nerf newbs. English doesn't borrow from other languages; it follows other languages down dark alleys, coshes them, then rummages in their pockets for loose grammar.
Akita T Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force	Posted - 2007.10.05 05:53:00 - [67] New from SiSi : heavy-duty Veldspar and Pyroxeres ore types. No idea of the refine yield on them yet though, but I hope it's AT LEAST double, if not a lot more. That would kind of counter-balance the tritanium cap removal, TBFH. Depends on bonus yield though. _ Caldari N.V.T.F. is recruiting...

Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.