Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 5 post(s) |
Karanth
Gallente Eve's Brothers of Destiny Free Trade Zone.
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 02:59:00 -
[31]
Change anything, and people will have to react. Most of the time, it's with whining, but meh.
Still, making moons generate random amounts of rarer stuff would be cool. Maybe make it so that you can set your harvester to "random". That way, of the available materials, it will pick one, and mine it for that cycle, following the current rules of mining, i.e. no doubling up harvesters on one material.
Silos will need a change, so they can handle random output. I know there is about a dozen, but one more that can have anything put in could do the job.
All that's left...
There is only one sig hijack that matters, the orginal and only member of the hijack squad. me. -Eris. ps Black russians are better then beer. Well, there's not many of *us* left! -Rauth
|
Br0wn 0ps
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 03:30:00 -
[32]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Good Stuff
I think the more appropriate approach to this problem would be to finally release a new version of moon miner...the Moon Harvesting Array II. This harvester would be able to withdraw 200 units per cycle of the material indicated by the moon scans, but would also be able to drill deeper into the moon and extract a variable amount and type(s) of other materials that are not part of the moon's abundant materials, with each cycle or day's materials being different. This amount would be stored in the array itself and manually delivered to it's destination (hangar, silo, etc.). The frequency of ultra-rare could be adjusted to what game design feels necessary from extraction/utilization reports.
|
Admiral Nova
Strike Team Nova
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 03:37:00 -
[33]
It looks like there is still alot of capacity in the low end carbides / sylramic fibers etc. The Jump Freighters make great use of this, if other ships were more armor plate heavy it would certainly make a difference.
|
Benvie
Benvie Enterprises
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 07:38:00 -
[34]
I think allowing many materials to come from any moon would be a bad idea. A large motivator for territorial control is control of the resources. If you get rid of that motivation then it takes a lot of oomph out of territorial control.
|
Tyr Zewa
Caldari MASS Ministry Of Amarrian Secret Service
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 07:43:00 -
[35]
Adding reactions, that reacts two moon minerals (100 each/hour) to a next tier moon mineral would help alot, balancing the cost and supply for this could be done in many way. - Requires a Reactor Array, not doable in Medium ones (higher fuel cost for the pos) - Only allow it from "fresh" harvested minerals, so the reactor has to be on the same pos - Add a new type of Reactor for it, that requires alot of resources -> Large Tower -> more fuel - Make it require sov (boosting 0.0 moons, which have higher logistic costs, making low tier minerals not worth the effort)
It's nice to see that you're taking up some of the problems the limited number of dysp + promethium moons causes.
Out of interest, how many Dyps and Promethium moons are out there, and how many are being harvested?
|
Yiasa
KronDair
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 12:13:00 -
[36]
Edited by: Yiasa on 13/12/2007 12:16:22 Edited by: Yiasa on 13/12/2007 12:15:38 Clearly the easiest fix is to;
- Double the ammount of adv. material you get from an advanced reaction (per hour)
- Half the volume of the adv. materials
*half factor can ofcourse be replaced by another factor*
This way;
- Logistics don't become more trouble some then they alreaddy are as the volume that needs to be moved stays the same
- No need to change existing infrastructure, no need to restructure posses.
- Small chance of possible new bugs that crop up.
- Easy fix, only a few attributes on existing items need to be changed, no need to rebalance adv. material requirements for t2 components.
- Altough this fix ill cause overal income from moon mining to drop it won't change the value between different moons such that the "gold nuggets" stay gold nuggets
- Fast deployment possible KronDair's Shipyard Sales
|
Captain Agemman
Minmatar Legio Ultra
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 12:36:00 -
[37]
Doubling the output pushes the problem further down the road. It doesn't fix the scalability problem of the current moon harvesting mechanic.
Short/Mid-term bandaid: - switch the rare moons in 0.4+ with unused moons in 0.0 - 0.3
Then, something like additional random output. You get 100 of what you really want an 10 of something else. Alternatively, 50 random and nothing else.
|
Hardigeen
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 12:37:00 -
[38]
How hard would be to open 0.4 systems to moon mining/reactions and why are they currently off limits? I think that would be the easiest and best solution to increase supply of moon minerals. I don't think that will help lower the price of high end minerals like Dysprosium, but it would provide short term price relief until you come up with another solution. I like the idea of tech 2 Moon Harvesters extracting high ends in some smaller amounts from any moon.
|
Sphene
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 13:11:00 -
[39]
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 :)
|
Helison
Gallente Times of Ancar Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 13:13:00 -
[40]
Just increasing the output of existing Dysp/Prom moons wonŠt do much good.
I think there are 2 possible ways to go: 1. Increase the number of sources of Dysp/Prom 2. Reduce the useage of Dysp/Prom and increase the useage of lower materials.
ad 2. I personally would prefer this solution, but it isnŠt really easy. If you change the dysp/prom useage in reactions, it might complicate reactions at all and might crash existing POS-networks. Reducing Ferrogel/Fermionic Condensates in components isnŠt easy either, as you only need one of these anyway. The easiest solution would be to change the useage of components, but even this might bring problems for some items.
The best solution would be one, where CCP doesnŠt have to regulate again later, when the market changes. This would be possible with a dynamic system with depleting supplies. But this dynamic system would also need much more programming work.
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 13:17:00 -
[41]
Some nice ideas, regarding ship based moon mining of moon fragments or the like. There are no current plans in this area as any such ship-based moon mining rate would quickly dwarf the starbase supply rates even if it was as low as 10 units an hour for example. It would generally lead to a bad place of starbases having no role.
Also regarding planets - we have other plans for those, but it is very possible we would use some of the common moon materials in the terraforming processes such as silicates and atmospheric gasses, Whilst also allowing some method of turning terran materials into moon materials perhaps. Though its too early to say anything other than its an idea we are looking at.
|
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 13:31:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Helison
2. Reduce the useage of Dysp/Prom and increase the useage of lower materials.
ad 2. I personally would prefer this solution, but it isnŠt really easy. If you change the dysp/prom useage in reactions, it might complicate reactions at all and might crash existing POS-networks. Reducing Ferrogel/Fermionic Condensates in components isnŠt easy either, as you only need one of these anyway. The easiest solution would be to change the useage of components, but even this might bring problems for some items.
The best solution would be one, where CCP doesnŠt have to regulate again later, when the market changes. This would be possible with a dynamic system with depleting supplies. But this dynamic system would also need much more programming work.
Any overhaul would be to try and accomplish as many goals as possible at once other than simply increasing supply. You are quite right in that we are unlikely to mess with current reactions themselves as starbases are fickle things when it comes to changes as we are all sadly acutely aware.
It is more likely that any change will be at the beginning of the process with extraction rate or the end with ship/module component requirements, unless we create new avenues to get between the two like new reaction lines.
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.
|
|
Sphene
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 13:52:00 -
[43]
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.
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 14:36:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Sphene
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
pretty sure I covered that in this line:
Quote: unless we create new avenues to get between the two like new reaction lines.
|
|
Aelena Thraant
Shadows of the Dead Aftermath Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 15:32:00 -
[45]
My idea to fix the problem....
A new pos module - Collider - A module that collides more common moon materials into less common moon minerals.
An example would be: Dysprosium Collision 100 - Atmospheric Gases 100 - Hydrocarbons 100 - Cobalt
Produces 25 units of Dysprosium per hour
All the numbers and components could be changed, but my thoughts were use the more common moon materials to make some of the rare moon materials. |
Daerkannon Shimmerscale
Gallente Paxton Industries Paxton Federation
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 15:34:00 -
[46]
Well if they choose to release tech 2 harvesters I hope they also release tech 2 towers. My poor Caldari towers are all maxed out on CPU and have no room to fit a tech 2 harvester. --- Honest officer, the dwarf was on fire when I got here! Can't find a mechanical engineering agent? Need a non-Caldari Navy agent? http://www.eve-agents.com/ for all your agent needs! |
Jacque Custeau
Knights of the Minmatar Republic
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 15:59:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Aelena Thraant My idea to fix the problem....
A new pos module - Collider - A module that collides more common moon materials into less common moon minerals.
An example would be: Dysprosium Collision 100 - Atmospheric Gases 100 - Hydrocarbons 100 - Cobalt
Produces 25 units of Dysprosium per hour
All the numbers and components could be changed, but my thoughts were use the more common moon materials to make some of the rare moon materials.
This sounds an awful lot like turning lead into gold, and I don't think that would be good for the economy either. -------------------
|
Sphene
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 16:21:00 -
[48]
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.
|
Arric Rohr
The Knights Templar Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 16:55:00 -
[49]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis Some nice ideas, regarding ship based moon mining of moon fragments or the like. There are no current plans in this area as any such ship-based moon mining rate would quickly dwarf the starbase supply rates even if it was as low as 10 units an hour for example. It would generally lead to a bad place of starbases having no role.
Also regarding planets - we have other plans for those, but it is very possible we would use some of the common moon materials in the terraforming processes such as silicates and atmospheric gasses, Whilst also allowing some method of turning terran materials into moon materials perhaps. Though its too early to say anything other than its an idea we are looking at.
I can understand the issue of ship based mining overwhelming supply, but if it was exploration based you could probably limit the new sources the same you do encryptors and the like.
Planets was just a thought, although I'm glad to hear you do have plans for them.
Although supply of t2 and the market is important, I can't emphasize enough that it is also important to make the sure that any changes don't:
1) Make the rich get richer. Some of the output increase ideas here would do just that.
2) Increase the channels for players to get in to high end moon material mining. I realize it's an "end-game" activity, although that phrase should have no meaning in an MMO, but at the same time limiting a game activity to what must be no more than a handful of players is frustrating for the rest of us.
One issue with EvE is although there is great breadth of play options, in many cases there is not enough depth. Missions for example, getting the same one 3 times in a row. Thousands of systems, many of them identical and no real reason to visit. The same rats appearing in the belts forever. Moon mining falls into the same category... thousands of moons, most of them useless.
Must stop before I go to far off track...
AR
*Where do I get one of those cool signatures?* |
Oortog
Caldari Dirty Deeds Corp. Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 17:15:00 -
[50]
Golden opportunity here to change many aspects of EVE and fix them for the better.
What would happen if instead of giving yet another golden nugget to the 0.0 alliances...we keep current assembly requirements intact and increased the supply-side with a very daring, interesting and bold move that would be fun, challenging and could result in hours and hours and hours of interesting logistics and tactics?
Take a look at low-sec systems and unused moons.. boost them to carry the rarer materials. What would this accomplish?
1) move the carebears in empire out a bit, into unused space. 2) give the pirates some JUICY targets. 3) Promote more interaction with the carebears and mercinary corps 4) The more courageous carebears who want this will need to grow some teeth. 5) The PvP in these areas would be absolutly a blast! Think of the tactics and logistics!
I could go on and on. The 0.0 alliances have enough to keep them out there... high-bounty ratting, rare ores, complexes, etc etc etc.
Time to pay low-sec back. Give them the rares...give them something to fight for.. give the pirates a plethora of targets.... make the carebears earn some meat... I mean.. EARN some meat.
Whole new types of alliances will spring up. It would make things very interesting.
|
|
Lanfeer
Caldari
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 18:41:00 -
[51]
i have just started in the last few weeks mining and reacting ferrofluid. i reject all of the above ideas for the next 6 months thank you |
Bruno Bonner
Gallente Lutin Group Acheron Federation
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 19:40:00 -
[52]
I've been thinking about this, and the easiest most balanced way to improve things is to seed a number of "empty" (as in having no minerals at all) moons in 0.0 with Dysprosium and whatever other rare moon minerals are needed.
There is currently a limit to the ammount of Dysprosium it can be produced. Increasing that limit will trigger a increase in the overall reaction-chains that can be operated, and therefore in the quantities of all moon minerals from basic to rares.
It is an availability issue that can be easily fixed in my view. Consider it as just placing more gold nuggets in between the mud.
Bruno ------ aka BinderAJ |
Narni
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 19:47:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Oortog
1) move the carebears in empire out a bit, into unused space. 2) give the pirates some JUICY targets.
3) Promote more interaction with the carebears and mercinary corps
4) The more courageous carebears who want this will need to grow some teeth.
5) The PvP in these areas would be absolutly a blast! Think of the tactics and logistics!
1. No. 2. Why? 3. Hmmm, it's often carebears that hires mercenarys already.. 4. No, they just join some pvp-alliance. 5. PVP is boring, and have been from day 1 of POS warfare.
|
William Ortega
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 22:23:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Narni Edited by: Narni on 13/12/2007 19:47:55
Originally by: Oortog
1) move the carebears in empire out a bit, into unused space. 2) give the pirates some JUICY targets.
3) Promote more interaction with the carebears and mercinary corps
4) The more courageous carebears who want this will need to grow some teeth.
5) The PvP in these areas would be absolutly a blast! Think of the tactics and logistics!
1. No. It's a reason some space is unused. 2. Why? 3. Hmmm, it's often carebears that hires mercenarys already.. 4. No, they just join some pvp-alliance. 5. PVP is boring, and have been from day 1 of POS warfare.
Thank you Narni,
Your insightfull and helpfull comments are an inspiration to us all.
|
Argenton Sayvers
|
Posted - 2007.12.13 23:26:00 -
[55]
Edited by: Argenton Sayvers on 13/12/2007 23:29:58 Disclaimer: I have *some* stakes in this issue, and dont claim otherwise.
This is your chance to finally get things right. For the first time ever, there are things in space actually worth fighting for*. People fought over space before, simply because its a game with lasers and starships. But people logged in their industrial or mission running empire alts when they needed ISK.
*Complexes are a different matter - you didnt actually need controll, just a farmer team at downtime.
Now you have the opportunity to make t2 about moons, and controll of ressources. Ressources that can be fought over, that create tension and conflict. Unlike 20 alt accounts running hundreds of jobs. While shooting yet another Guristas Fleet in 0.8.
Bottlenecks like dysprosium and promethium will create situations where war is desirable. Where control of 0.0 actually means something. Not just a "hollyday resort" where rich industrialists recover from the burden of civilisation.
Of course, you can just "increase supply". Make every moon mine 10x. Seed the moon mimerals on market. After all, the masses want cheap t2 for everyone. And eve is about getting what you want right away, or at least after 20h of afk 100% safe empire ISK grind, right?
|
William Ortega
|
Posted - 2007.12.14 00:13:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Argenton Sayvers Edited by: Argenton Sayvers on 13/12/2007 23:29:58 Disclaimer: I have *some* stakes in this issue, and dont claim otherwise.
This is your chance to finally get things right. For the first time ever, there are things in space actually worth fighting for*. People fought over space before, simply because its a game with lasers and starships. But people logged in their industrial or mission running empire alts when they needed ISK.
*Complexes are a different matter - you didnt actually need controll, just a farmer team at downtime.
Now you have the opportunity to make t2 about moons, and controll of ressources. Ressources that can be fought over, that create tension and conflict. Unlike 20 alt accounts running hundreds of jobs. While shooting yet another Guristas Fleet in 0.8.
Bottlenecks like dysprosium and promethium will create situations where war is desirable. Where control of 0.0 actually means something. Not just a "hollyday resort" where rich industrialists recover from the burden of civilisation.
Of course, you can just "increase supply". Make every moon mine 10x. Seed the moon mimerals on market. After all, the masses want cheap t2 for everyone. And eve is about getting what you want right away, or at least after 20h of afk 100% safe empire ISK grind, right?
Mostly agree with you on this. Space should be worth fighting for and with as much money as can be made in empire afk missions and drone **** there should be a reason why 0.0 is more lucrative than others.
On the other hand I did like the idea of making low sec more attractive (couple of posts up). As it is right now, low sec is dead. Don't get me wrong there can be plenty of pew pew in low sec, especially in systems leading to 0.0 entrance choke points, where major alliances, mercs, little bit of pirates duke it out. But that is mainly spill over from 0.0 wars and there is no real attractive reason to really "live" in low sec. As I said there are systems like that, but most other low sec systems are quiet backwaters: ratting there is not worth it (wrt to mission running or 0.0 ratting), mining is a joke, etc.
Previous attempts by CPP to move people to low sec failed reasonably spectacularly: lvl 5 missions do not offer enough reward v.s. risk, booster manufacturing never really took off (even though it has been around for a while now). Maybe if they moved some really sexy and lucrative profession exclusively to low sek (e.g. chemist mixer as proposed little bit above) they can finally find a siver bullet for low sec. Empire industrialists would come out to low sec to make mad $, pirates would come out to steal some mad $, plenty of pew pew, reduced bottlenecks... fun stuff
|
Arric Rohr
The Knights Templar Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.12.14 00:13:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Argenton Sayvers blah, blah, blah
That sounds great in principle, but in practice it's just silly. Do you have any idea how much isk you can make by controlling one of these moons? Does a billion a week or more sound right? Do you have any idea how much defensive infrastructure you can put in place for a billion a week, not to mention little greedy merc corps you can hire? These moons are not going to change hands, take that as a given and work on your "ideas," such as they are, from there.
AR
*Where do I get one of those cool signatures?* |
William Ortega
|
Posted - 2007.12.14 00:24:00 -
[58]
Didn't a whole bunch of them change place very recently due to the war in the south?
|
Argenton Sayvers
|
Posted - 2007.12.14 01:34:00 -
[59]
Edited by: Argenton Sayvers on 14/12/2007 01:36:13
Originally by: Arric Rohr Does a billion a week or more sound right?
Are you joking? A billion per week? I know plenty of solo players who make that PER DAY. In the safety of empire.
Defensive hardware is useless once MC shows up.
No POS defense in the world is going to stop even one of those pet alliances noone ever heard of. When a POS is under serious attack, you need players, dozens, maybe hundreds, to defend it.
How many players do you need to make one billion per week? 4 casual mission runners will be enough.
OF course, you may be refering to cynojammers wich is something a bit more complicated, as its an entirely different type of problem. Lets put it that way - i didnt put them into the game ... Obviously, POS warfare needs to be evaluated and rebalanced as well.
As for lowsec - everything that boosts lowsec is good by default. However, i think moon mining fits perfectly into territorial control, which again fits perfectly with 0.0 empires. Lowsec needs something more "YARR", though obviously, there are worse things you could do.
|
Verite Rendition
Caldari F.R.E.E. Explorer Atrum Tempestas Foedus
|
Posted - 2007.12.14 01:36:00 -
[60]
Originally by: Arric Rohr
Originally by: Argenton Sayvers blah, blah, blah
That sounds great in principle, but in practice it's just silly. Do you have any idea how much isk you can make by controlling one of these moons? Does a billion a week or more sound right? Do you have any idea how much defensive infrastructure you can put in place for a billion a week, not to mention little greedy merc corps you can hire? These moons are not going to change hands, take that as a given and work on your "ideas," such as they are, from there.
AR
A billion a week doesn't go as far as you'd think. Sure it's profitable, but then you need cap ship fleets to defend your moons from the next guy that wants a billion a week, and pay people to do all of the logistics work, etc. Living in 0.0 is expensive, it sounds profitable on paper but it it's not so much once you need to pay for everything you have to do to live in 0.0. ---- FREE Explorer Lead Megalomanic EVE Automated Influence Map |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |