|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Sphene
   |
Posted - 2007.12.13 13:11:00 -
[1]
 Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Moon material distribution and 'mud'
Mud is the technical term we use to describe the model distribution of moon materials, it is much like panning for gold, lots of mud and very few nuggets. However this is fundamentally different to traditional asteroid ore and minerals where we require large quantities of common materials and less of the rarer ones. With moon mining we require very little of the mud like atmospheric gases since the scaling of common to rare material comes at the complex reaction stage rather than the initial extraction stage such as in the case of ore mining and tech I demand.
This does present some other possible avenues of change by making the 'mud' useful which is introduce new reactions which require lots of mud and produce some quantity of the advanced materials.
... easy solution ... use mud in higher quantities for new composants .. use new composant for T3 :)
|
Sphene
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 13:52:00 -
[2]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis
Each option like any will have pros and cons which we have to weigh, but a simple band aid fix wont really do either. We would rather spend more time to overhaul the system once so it is more future proof and also an improvement upon the existing system than have to continuously revisit it.
Yes but you are free to add more reaction in the market without changing anything in the POS system.
if for exemple you create a new reaction formula
10000 silicates + 100 hafnium = 50 ferrofluid
In order to avoid some monopoly situation on some matTrials.
We can understand that there is perhaps not only one way to obtain a material.
|
Sphene
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 16:21:00 -
[3]
Originally by: Jacque Custeau
This sounds an awful lot like turning lead into gold, and I don't think that would be good for the economy either.
that s a good point ... i think CCP need to fellow the path of invention (which is not so bad)
There is the easy way to obtain T2 ... via BPO and the hard way via invention (hard way because you need skills, copy, interface and luck)
In order to introduce new reaction as "regulator" the cost of the new reaction must be quite high.
The aim of the new production is not to reduce price of Isotope near 0 but to avoid high prices.
My idea is to have a new mini profession a kind of "Chemistry Master" who will be able to transform element at high costs.
It will include new skill perhaps a new reactor ... and if you are smart an interaction with R&D agents :)
From an economical point of view the chemist should be profitable only when a final material is considered in shortage (which means high price)
The chemist in this situation is not a Meterial producer but a price regulator.
|
Sphene
|
Posted - 2007.12.14 15:24:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Jacque Custeau
I understand that those advocating the "alchemy" option (lead->gold)are saying it will be an inefficient process, but that still does not make it a good solution. What happens when there is a morphite shortage? do we come out with a Morphite BPO that converts other minerals into Morphite? No we wouldn't, because that would be unfair to the mercoxit miners.
I don't have any dysprosium moons, but I am against radical changes like boosting output. What I like about the moon minerals and reaction chains now is that from start to finish it is a very complex process. I am yet to meet anyone who owns an entire chain of POS's that mines the minerals, reacts them twice (simple and complex) and then builds t2 components. The investment in POS's, the logistics needed to maintain them and shift materials about, and the man hours involved in supervision are astounding. The current system lends itself to lots of different middle men, like myself, who can make money without moon mining at all. I hope any system that Chronotis comes up with does not make it easy for everyone to own the entire process from start to end.
I agree but there is a lot of difference between minerals and moon materials. If the mud would be as usefull as it is for minerals, we will not have this problem.
|
Sphene
|
Posted - 2007.12.14 15:25:00 -
[5]
Originally by: iNOX
There are only 2 quite simple solutins of this problem.The 1st one is to make more moons with rare metals the other one just to boost output in reactos for adv.materials or combine 2 solutions.
Other decisions which here have been offered potentially can cause more problems with balance and more bugs.
IMHO the worst solution ... too much moon too much materials and price crash ...
If you have enough meterials for the moment ... the same pb appears 6 month later ...
|
|
|
| |
|