Originally by: Alz Shado

---

Really?

Does every suggestion for "fixing" the economy have to translate into industrialists becoming the Wal-Marts of Eve? Once their small-time NPC competitors are gone, the world will be a much brighter place because someone with a dozen alts is selling 1mn Afterburners and Small shield extenders at 20% more then they're worth now?

I mean, Really?

That the best fixes you can come up with are more skills, that will only take existing industrialists a month out of being in the same position they're in now, and give newbies one *more* month of catching up to do? The only ones who would profit from this are the skillbook manufacturers (hint: they're ALL NPCS!)

C'mon, Really?

The Miners don't like T1 reprocessors because they compete with them, and yet the best mining corp in EVE can't compete with a sweatshop in some asian basement running a cadre of hulks 23/7. The producers don't like T1 loot drops because they keep the volume high enough for the resale margins to revolve around mineral rates, which keeps regional variance of prices low and yet lowsec still starves for anything resembling a market hub?

Oh Really?

Market resellers think that the magic pill to solving all of their margin issues will be fixed if they can change the price dependent on standings, and yet don't consider for a moment what a single neutral alt will do if that's the keystone to the whole fix. Or if you're competing with a blue? And yet, they'll ALL still find themselves sitting in Jita, leapfrogging one another every five minutes.

REALLY!

The fixes to the industrial "Issues" which seem to be plaguing the old billionaires club have less to do with the underlying system then the do the tactics they have at their disposal. The facts are that any barriers to entry in industrialism will be overcome shortly, breaking the whole system anew. So, how do you "fix" a system that's natural equilibrium is below their comfortable profit margins?

Variation, innovation, specialization, and risk.

Variation - Allow industrialists to create something unique, with customized strengths and weaknesses. Look to the Booster template for how benefits and drawbacks can be implemented.

Innovation - instead of removing/cutting back on T1 loot drops, instead make named goods drop as BPCs in highsec. This will limit the straight-to-market or reprocessing value of these items, but still provide a revenue stream for mission runners and marketeers, as well as boost demand for minerals. In lowsec, named goods might drop as completed modules but damaged. Faction spawns can be more frequent, but similarly drop BPCs requiring high level skills to produce.

Specialization - Why do I need individual skills to train up each race's ships, but one 'Frigate Construction' skill builds them all? And why should all the ships end up being the same, no matter who produces them? Specialization skills tied in with an individual's race (only Minmatar can learn Minmatar Battleship Specialization, for instance) that can boost the stats of their produced ships a percentage point or two per level.

Risk - Put more benefit to production in unsafe areas, not less. Add Stations that specialize in production that give speed or efficiency boosts in .4-.0 systems. Alliance controlled Faction Outposts that can be upgraded to offer true production capability far from empire, that can offer on-demand production from anyone as long as a BPO is (permanently) installed at the station, with a cost tree that starts at the minimum minerals required for production and ends at whatever you think is obscene.

Don't be so narrow-minded that nerfing others is your best hope of seeing some small benefit for yourselves. Instead, look to the future, add MORE options and MORE possibilities. T3, Named T2, Customization, Set Bonuses, there's so much more to the future of industry than "NERF LOOT"

---

Originally by: Mephie

---

...
As far as ships, I think miners do need a highsec Forman Bonus ship, even if the Orca is more the equivalent of a ORE BC (BC5, Barge5, Logi4(Exhumer4?), 3 warfares, 3% per lvl, maybe a light drone bonus and/or Marauder-like tractor bonus). And for haulers, a ship that fills the enormous gap between Indies and Freighters would be nice.
A ship with honest-to-god salvaging bonuses would be sweet.

...

--Meph

---

Originally by: Mephie

---

Just to chime in with a bit of feature creep:

As far as ships, I think miners do need a highsec Forman Bonus ship, even if the Orca is more the equivalent of a ORE BC (BC5, Barge5, Logi4(Exhumer4?), 3 warfares, 3% per lvl, maybe a light drone bonus and/or Marauder-like tractor bonus). And for haulers, a ship that fills the enormous gap between Indies and Freighters would be nice.
A ship with honest-to-god salvaging bonuses would be sweet.

---

Originally by: Treenara Mazouk

---

Indie/Freighter ship would indeed be a wonderful addition for us Industrialist.

---

Originally by: iskopoly

---

they need to be very careful if they nerf mission loot drops.

I feel mission loot is important and useful for minerals and such. so it should at least be replaced with something of similar value if it is at all.

and for someone suggesting that mission runners would just start running for LP's if drops were removed, you are most likely right. BUT I imagine the LP market would be even more saturated as it already is and LP value would drop even further, thus killing missions even more.

while some might not do very many missions for others it is a very important part of their gameplay.

---

Originally by: Letrange

---

Originally by: iskopoly

---

they need to be very careful if they nerf mission loot drops.

I feel mission loot is important and useful for minerals and such. so it should at least be replaced with something of similar value if it is at all.

and for someone suggesting that mission runners would just start running for LP's if drops were removed, you are most likely right. BUT I imagine the LP market would be even more saturated as it already is and LP value would drop even further, thus killing missions even more.

while some might not do very many missions for others it is a very important part of their gameplay.

---

I was under the impression from the posts about this that they would replace the module drops with "stuff" drops. said "stuff" (sorta like salvage) would go into making named modules (metalevel 1 thru 4). This would kill two birds with one stone. Remove the effective minerals drops from the non-hauler rats. Add more for industry to make and sell.

---

Originally by: Treenara Mazouk

---

Edited by: Treenara Mazouk on 19/09/2008 17:15:59

Originally by: Letrange

---

Originally by: iskopoly

---

they need to be very careful if they nerf mission loot drops.

I feel mission loot is important and useful for minerals and such. so it should at least be replaced with something of similar value if it is at all.

and for someone suggesting that mission runners would just start running for LP's if drops were removed, you are most likely right. BUT I imagine the LP market would be even more saturated as it already is and LP value would drop even further, thus killing missions even more.

while some might not do very many missions for others it is a very important part of their gameplay.

---

I was under the impression from the posts about this that they would replace the module drops with "stuff" drops. said "stuff" (sorta like salvage) would go into making named modules (metalevel 1 thru 4). This would kill two birds with one stone. Remove the effective minerals drops from the non-hauler rats. Add more for industry to make and sell.

---

By posts about it, do you mean here on theis thread, or from what you've read here and there? Where?

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

...

The CSM notes from the meeting indicated that the dev team already had it in the idea bin of removing or lowering loot and changing all T1 manufacturing to require various mats much akin to how salvage operates now..... leaving mins who knows where it wasn't really covered but my guess is it would be adding another layer of manufacturing to the process or changing the process so that it was alternate mats to mins... who knows.

Basically the agreement in the dev team was that to have this set number of mins be able to manufacture EVERYTHING T1 in game was rather absurd given the complexities of every other system

---

Originally by: Treenara Mazouk

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

...

The CSM notes from the meeting indicated that the dev team already had it in the idea bin of removing or lowering loot and changing all T1 manufacturing to require various mats much akin to how salvage operates now..... leaving mins who knows where it wasn't really covered but my guess is it would be adding another layer of manufacturing to the process or changing the process so that it was alternate mats to mins... who knows.

Basically the agreement in the dev team was that to have this set number of mins be able to manufacture EVERYTHING T1 in game was rather absurd given the complexities of every other system

---

Got a link to that Kazzac?

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

Basically the agreement in the dev team was that to have this set number of mins be able to manufacture EVERYTHING T1 in game was rather absurd given the complexities of every other system

---

Originally by: Professor Leech

---

Edited by: Professor Leech on 12/10/2008 22:59:57

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

Basically the agreement in the dev team was that to have this set number of mins be able to manufacture EVERYTHING T1 in game was rather absurd given the complexities of every other system

---

If rat loot was a separate economy or involved in a separate mini profession that would be substantial improvement.

Minerals from mining, rat loot components and salvage being 3 distinctly separate processes would be good. Then npc convoy raiding could be improved to involve the new profession. Instead of dropping npc trade goods (isk faucet) they could drop rat loot components.

This would also be the boost miners are after as mining would be required to obtain minerals (rather than all the other sources). Edit: with exception of drone alloys (but drones drops could be made into a completely separate system (not just faction drones)).

---

Originally by: Kylar Renpurs

---

I know I know, crossposting and all that jazz, but just spotted this one in the S&I area (Linkage).

Wonder if this'll be slated for midas?

---

Originally by: Shar Tegral

---

So is there still any rumors about when an industry patch is going to be released??

---

Originally by: CCP Wrangler

---

There's a Community petition category??

---

Originally by: SencneS

---

If I set you as -10, and place something on the market for 1,000,000. And -10 means I give you a 10% penalty, you will see it on the market for 1,100,000, and not 1,000,000.
...
As a seller, I don't have to worry about selling to the enemy. I Could set my alliance as +10 and that +10 means I give a 50% discount. Now I place Ravens on the market for 180mil, meaning to everyone in the region that is not in my alliance see it on the market for 180mil. But my alliance is 90mil.

I don't care if the enemy pay 180mil for my Raven, let em! but I care about my alliance buying my stuff at reasonable prices without some a-hole npc corp hugging alt coming and gobbling up the entire stations supply.

In empire it plays a much more devious role. If I'm selling something and someone under cuts me by 0.01 isk. I'll buy one of their items and set my standing to -10. So when they look at the market I will be WAY down on their list as the lowest price. Can you say eliminating 0.01 bid wars overnight therefor reducing market lag everywhere it exists. Because that is exactly how people would use it.

Imagine not having to create contracts to sell minerals to manufactures as a miner. Instead you could just put your minerals on the market and set up your deal with the manufacture to give a 20% discount. The market sees Trit for 2.6, but you see it for 2.2. Then you set your manufactured items on the market for whatever and give THEM 20% discount.

The single greatest market PVP expansions is only a standings option away from being added to the game... Too bad CCP will not put the time and effort into adding REAL market PVP like this to the game.

Consider this - Most every retailer in the world has an the RIGHT to refuse service to a customer. Unfortunately in EVE that's just not an option.

---

Originally by: Raaz Satik

---

Originally by: SencneS

---

Someone said "Positive/Negative price changes would be bad, because if they see something for x that is exactly what they want to pay, not all of a sudden pay more." That would not happen if they implemented the change correctly.

If I set you as -10, and place something on the market for 1,000,000. And -10 means I give you a 10% penalty, you will see it on the market for 1,100,000, and not 1,000,000. This would HELP SO MUCH with alliances in 0.0 it's not funny.

---

The market window in Jita is already almost un-usable it's so slow at times. Imagine how slow it would get if you had to recalculate everyprice in the database for every market price request.

---

Originally by: Kazzac Elentria

---

And instead of allowing alternate mats at the point of construction. Place it before and add another manufacturing step. BPOs that allow specific amounts of one mineral to be processed into another.

Add however many layers of complexity you want to the situation, such as only doable in a POS station, lengthy build queue, etc...

---

Originally by: CornerStoner

---

Just add this pseudo industrial expansion to CCPs long list of Customer Relations blunders. I guess they thought the Orca and some changes to transports were industry expansions.

---

Originally by: Brock Nelson

---

Well, ever since they nerfed ghost training, I don't think so.

On the other hand, I was watching the QR's teaser video and I was very interested in the market ticker at the bottom of the video. Anybody already suggested that or is something like that not being considered?

---