| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Lieutenant Isis
Gristle Industries
   |
Posted - 2008.07.23 17:53:00 -
[31]
Yes, please. This will add much needed complexity and realism to T1.
For those whining about having to actually do work to build t1 ships and mods: Just buy the components off the market directly. This will allow newer players to build components and sell them to older players who don't wish to bother.
For those complaining that their slots will be clogged: I recommend that many more slots be added to lowsec stations. This will give industrialists (of which I am one) a reason to go to lowsec.
|
Pwett
QUANT Corp.
QUANT Hegemony
|
Posted - 2008.07.23 18:01:00 -
[32]
 Originally by: Kazzac Elentria
I support, but only if you remove T1 items as loot.
_______________
Pwett
CEO, Founder, & Executor
<Q> QUANT Hegemony
|
Finraer
Caldari
M.A.D.
|
Posted - 2008.07.23 20:11:00 -
[33]
It's an intriguing idea but my fear would be the effect on prices and ship production profit.
Let's say, for sake of example, a producer buying minerals and building a ship looks to make 10% profit on mineral costs to sell the ship.
Now, let's add in an initial producer, producing components from minerals that are then used to build a ship. Either:
- one producer does the whole process himself and sells for 10% above mineral cost; or
- a producer produces components, seeking a return above mineral cost, and a producer produces a ship from components, seeking a return above component cost.
In the first case, one guy still does it all and all the new idea has added is another step in a producer's processes that isn't particularly exciting.
In the second case:
- if the ship price and the mineral costs remain the same, the two producers will each receive a reduced profit (if shared equally, it reduces production profit down to 5% on materal costs); or
- ship prices rise by 10% (broadly) to mean production remains as profitable as ever.
I am not convinced the balance of the market is such that prices would simply rise by 10%. I suspect that, in practice, there would be a small rise, since there will always be a number of producers willing to do the whole lot themselves and provide downward pressure.
The result would be that:
- Starting producers and producers not running the whole process would suffer reduced profits from component/ship manufacture
- Producers with sufficient infrastructure in place to run the whole process themselves will see more profits coming their way.
I'd vote no on that basis.
I do like the idea of adding complexity to the production path (I am a producer myself) but I don't think this is the way to do it.
Fin
http://thesurrealist.co.uk/monster?def=Finraer
|
Letrange
Chaosstorm Corporation
Apoapsis Multiversal Consortium
|
Posted - 2008.07.23 21:12:00 -
[34]
Should have been there from the beginning.
|
Herschel Yamamoto
Bloodmoney Incorporated
|
Posted - 2008.07.23 21:24:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Finraer
I do like the idea of adding complexity to the production path (I am a producer myself) but I don't think this is the way to do it.
How do you add complexity to production if you keep the one-step path of "minerals plus blueprint equals spaceship"?
------------------
Fix the forums! |
procurement specialist
|
Posted - 2008.07.23 21:31:00 -
[36]
i support.
i support the removal of named items from loot and the replacement with components to keep minerals from ratting/missions ok.
i support as a step in implementing meta bpos for all non-faction gear to be player made as well.
|
Finraer
Caldari
M.A.D.
|
Posted - 2008.07.23 23:23:00 -
[37]
Edited by: Finraer on 23/07/2008 23:24:14
Originally by: Herschel Yamamoto
Originally by: Finraer
I do like the idea of adding complexity to the production path (I am a producer myself) but I don't think this is the way to do it.
How do you add complexity to production if you keep the one-step path of "minerals plus blueprint equals spaceship"?
Short answer - not this way, as I stated and for the reasons that I stated. :)
I think you may have misunderstood my statement (my own fault as I wasn't clear enough)- in my opinion, the career path of a producer needs more complexity (I referred to this as the "production path") - this does not need to equate to adding steps to the existing production process.
In fact, I think that adding a new "first step" to the existing production process is going to cause more harm than good.
My argument is that, as far as I see it:
- the proposal is likely to make production less profitable for new players and not exactly encourage them into production as a result (new producers can aways build modules - do they really need a new barrier to entry to producing ships and the option to build components at what I think will be lower profit?); on the other hand
- the proposal means that existing experienced producers will be buying components to build ships rather than buying minerals to build ships - now that's not exactly enhancing their game play either.
As an example of what I think is a much better suggestion - another thread has suggested introducing an advanced form of tech 1 production to get higher meta level modules with use of skills and possible other components. This adds something to the production path and is far more worthy of support.
I am sure that there are other suggestions that have been made or could be arrived at that add a new feature to explore and make production as a career more complex. Adding an extra step that potentially harms the smaller producer isn't the way to do it.
Fin
http://thesurrealist.co.uk/monster?def=Finraer
|
Icarus Starkiller
|
Posted - 2008.07.23 23:42:00 -
[38]
Dumb idea, I don't support this at all.
Not only will it drive new players away from production (because new players will not have access to researched BPOs, so will be forced to buy it all. They can't research them as there is no research in empire for a new industrialist unless they own a POS) but it will add another layer of time into ship production that is simply not needed.
Leave things as they are, they're plenty complicated enough as is.
-
Life is pain...anyone who says differently is selling something. |
Astria Tiphareth
Caldari
24th Imperial Crusade
|
Posted - 2008.07.24 08:25:00 -
[39]
Edited by: Astria Tiphareth on 24/07/2008 08:26:11
I'd really like to see this in.
One really big issue that this strikes me as causing is a problem with T1 ship insurance. It's currently the case that we can't insure T2 ships because of the T2 component market. You can't pay out an accurate insurance on mineral value when the minerals aren't the base cost, the components are, and those components are player-driven.
Thus either T1 components are provided straight by NPCs, in which case what was the point, or we have to change insurance.
Originally by: Icarus Starkiller
Not only will it drive new players away from production (because new players will not have access to researched BPOs, so will be forced to buy it all. They can't research them as there is no research in empire for a new industrialist unless they own a POS) but it will add another layer of time into ship production that is simply not needed.
Rubbish. I'm a new industrialist, and it didn't put me off at all. A typical wait time on an ME slot is about 20 days. In that time I've mined, built, PvPed, done a fair amount of real life work, it's not a big deal.
___
My views may not represent those of my corporation or alliance, which is why I never get invited to those diplomatic parties... |
Kazzac Elentria
|
Posted - 2008.07.24 12:37:00 -
[40]
Originally by: Astria Tiphareth
One really big issue that this strikes me as causing is a problem with T1 ship insurance. It's currently the case that we can't insure T2 ships because of the T2 component market. You can't pay out an accurate insurance on mineral value when the minerals aren't the base cost, the components are, and those components are player-driven.
Remove insurance and remove T1 loot saved for named items.
Let the market, be a true market. |
Venkul Mul
|
Posted - 2008.07.24 13:55:00 -
[41]
Edited by: Venkul Mul on 24/07/2008 14:00:23
I don't totally like this idea, but industry need to be made better, so I will support a throughout restructuration of industry and mining.
If that is done I will even support the removal of T1 loot from missions.
So tentative support for a complete overhaul of industry and mining.
Originally by: Alz Shado
Only if this is accompanied by
-CCP removing pre-built "named" T1 modules and making rats drop BPCs for them instead.
-Reprocessed unnamed T1 mods, instead of returning minerals, would offer the T1 components used to make the Named variations.
-Manufacturing named T1 modules would require the appropriate BPC, requisite T1 components (depending on their Meta level, the better the good the more components it requires), as well as current unnamed T1 mineral amount for that module.
Good idea with the exception of the BPC dropped from rats. They could drop "damaged" versions that you need to repair, but how often you run around with BPC in your cargo?
A occasional BPC that a special rat was carrying is ok, even if I would prefer them to drop from structures in exploration sites, but it becoming a everyday event is absurd.
|
Lieutenant Isis
Gristle Industries
|
Posted - 2008.07.24 17:45:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Icarus Starkiller
Dumb idea, I don't support this at all.
Not only will it drive new players away from production (because new players will not have access to researched BPOs, so will be forced to buy it all. They can't research them as there is no research in empire for a new industrialist unless they own a POS) but it will add another layer of time into ship production that is simply not needed.
Leave things as they are, they're plenty complicated enough as is.
I actually see this as a way to make getting into production easier. Beginners will now only have to buy a small handful of BPOs that are much cheaper then a ship BPO. Even buying a simple cruiser BPO is out of the question for beginners, were as buying a few cheap component BPOs then selling them to the bigger builders. You seem to forget that these components could be bought and sold on the market. One person doesn't (shouldn't) need to do it all on their own.
If a beginer wishes to build his own ship, then he could buy a BPC and then buy the components off the market or use his own BPO library, much like it already happens.
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |