Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
SiJira
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 20:39:00 -
[91]
there better be another solution coming before the new year Trashed sig, Shark was here |
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 20:43:00 -
[92]
sorry greyscale, but this is a very short sighted "fix". We will be in the exact same place, market wise, in 6 months that we are now, if not even worse.
There is no natural supply problem currently with the moon poo high ends, it is an artificial supply problem caused by market manipulation. We will see the same thing occur with this "solution" you have provided. --
|
Franga
NQX Innovations
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 20:46:00 -
[93]
Edited by: Franga on 27/10/2008 20:47:07
Originally by: Machine Delta You don't really want people to have a reason to stay in true 0.0 do you.
Poor baby.
On topic content: sounds good to me. Anything that offers alternatives is always good in my books. |
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 20:49:00 -
[94]
"If you think this is sounding remarkably similar to the original situation with T2 BPOs, you're not alone!"
Wrong wrong wrong!!!
High end moons should be really UPGRADED in value and not downgraded. So that the big alliances should fight tooth and nail over them!
Why do you hold 0.0 space? It becomes more and more worthless, now with the downgrade of high end moons it is even more useless.
That is wrong!!
Please think about it. |
Vio Geraci
Amarr GoonFleet GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 21:07:00 -
[95]
Originally by: Bane Glorious
Originally by: Vio Geraci A more effective solution would be introducing quanitites of moon minerals in gravimetric sites,
I like this idea.
Thanks ^_^ |
Mr Horizontal
Gallente KIA Corp KIA Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 21:30:00 -
[96]
Here's a better thought idea for you all to think about:
Linky
Chairman | www.eve-bank.net |
Manfred Rickenbocker
The Elliance Delta.Green
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 21:51:00 -
[97]
Some questions to Dr. EyjoG:
Is moon mineral price a supply problem? Is it a demand problem? How many hands do moon minerals(and products) pass through before it reaches end-result (T2 product)? How much is vertically integrated? (sold on market vs. put directly into a reaction) What percentage of these valuable moons are held by large groups of individuals? (addressing cartels) What percentage of "valuable" moons are productive? How much is lost due to production inefficiencies? How much is lost before it reaches market?
I dont see any of these questions really compromising the security of current moon owners but it could lend some valuable data in how they are being utilized and enabling the player base to offer more informed suggestions. |
Roemy Schneider
BINFORD
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 22:01:00 -
[98]
welcome to market discussions ~22 months ago. seriously, we pointed out the bottleneck and nothing was done about it. it's not about "told you so" - it's about the time it took.
Quote: and from time to time we have to make changes to the system to make sure supply and demand is well- balanced and healthy
and now you came up with a 20:1 ratio.... bullcrap not because of the price (the oil example/philosophy is ok'ish) but because of the POSsetups. this solution does not consider any particular target group, expecially not the ones involved and it is nothing more than bad controlling from a purely economic standpoint.
i suppose i'll be *****ed back at and yes i am glad that "something" was done - yay. but come on... do you want me to suck on a cadmium moon and then leave me with 10 whooping ferrofluid. i take it we won't be able to place a _couple of_ cadmium silos (-2000/h) next to a hafnium silo/moon and still be able to produce 200 ferrofluid...? (...and feed the rest of the chain) and are we going to need an exit silo for 95 hafn or are you clever enough to just use up 5 hafnium? or will this use (most of) the current code? 'cause.... i think i know how CCP "fixes" things....
then this is probably dead before it's even born. it will bring the high prices down - to an extend that's not really felt in the long run (sure, there'll be some speculation). but it will boost the crap stuff a little - enough to be felt. however, not enough for the big names to bother. tenants/pets/bob-slaves might want to do this to "compress" their r16 stuff.
cheaper T2? i doubt it. the easiest example: sylramic fibres mentionable ingredients: chromium+platinum=hexite this stuff goes into every T2 item, not even the small, racial stuff does that. but look, now those two are supposed to help out on the prom/neod front. guess what happens... and all other "alchemy" follows this example with a few extra steps more complicated than this - but the same direction. so it is safe to say this won't bring t2 prices down. the money is being redistributed and even that word doesnt fit aince we're talking a very few %. it might slow down the pace of the big stuff spiraling upwards, but it won't stop it. the dysprosium-regions will remain, impass remain the least visited region despite the transit its geographics might led to believe, nothing will change.
i can't if the doc wants more and the coders don't want to give it to him or vice versa. but it is not enough. and i'm done accepting "pre-nerfs" as we all got to know CCP enough to know nothing will happen after that for years |
Mommas Boy
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 22:01:00 -
[99]
The 20 times slower to produce is the kicker part, to be honest. My corp is doing reactions to make fermionics, to make a steady income. We now have 4 towers up and running and we are using promo and dispro in the reaction chain we now have. Considering that we could cut the amount we produce in half and save one tower, we would still need an additional 7 towers to produce half the amount we are currently producing. In other words, we would need 12 towers to eliminate the promo and dispro, and only produce half the fermionics we now produce.
Those 7 additional towers are what, 2.5 billion in additional fuel each month, since we buy all the fuel and donĘt mine it ourselves.
We only make less than 3 billion a month in profits now. Cut that in half, and we would make less than 1.5 billion. In other words, we would actually start to loose isk if we switched to this system, as opposed to making isk, by about 1 bil a month, due to the increased fuel requirements.
It would also increase our manpower requirement by almost 4 or 5 times, due to additional silo management and fueling demands.
Also, considering that the new mid levels are likely to go up in price, and the existing high ends are going to go down.... maybeą. perhapsą well, possibly slightly down, it will make a lot of reactions more, not less, expensive.
What CCP should have done is made it so that you use 2 low ends and 1 mid end, mix them together and get the high end substitute, without the silly 5% production time. Even a 25 or 33% production time might be reasonable, but the 5% kills with the necessary additional POS fuel and effort requirements.
The low end moons are very rarely mined, unless you have a very specific use for them, because they are so low end and don't get you anything worth wild to just market the material. It cost more in fuel than you get for the moon min, unless you are using the POS for research or something, and have the space (which isn't likely) to fit on a free miner and silo. The mid ends are currently mined because they are break even or slightly profitable. Instead of attempting to degrade the high ends, they really should have upgraded the low ends as well, so that there is more value to them. This is supposed to be a game after all, and as such, it should be fun.
So, if it were me, you mix 100 units of low end A, 100 units of low end B, and 100 units of mid grade C, and get Substitute high end D, 100 units. You now need 4 silos, one reactor, and if you toss a moon miner on there, you basically have filled up a large POS. You can even apply the same process to the mid ends, so that you mix 2 low ends and end up with a mid end. This assumes you are equating one moon mineral with another, placing them into the reaction chain will change the semantics of what I am saying, but I felt this was a bit clearer of a way to express the concept.
With their system, you now need 3 silos and a reactor to make a substitute high end. Then, you need to have 3 more silos and a reactor to make that into the actual high end, but you only get 10% of what you normally would have, with a lot of recyclable waste product as well (very similar to how they do drug manufacturing for anybody that has watched that). That may, or may not, just fit on a large POS. Borderline, to be honest, but provably would. BUT, you now need 10 of those POS's to equal 1 high end moon with a miner on it.
This is the Fail on CCP's part due to not looking into the entire economic chain. Nor does this resolve any of the problems with the neodymium and thulium rare minerals not being nearly as useful. You donĘt address any of the demand issues you created by making the dyspro in particular a necessary reactant to such a huge amount of T2 products.
Unless you are a small entity, too far from empire to easily do the import / export, and are trying to be self sufficient and need this for some ungodly reason, I don't see it happening. Sad really, as they are really just making the large 0.0 with 8 titan entities more entrenched.
Thinking more about this, I see the promo and dispro only have very small impacts, like less than 20%, where the mid ends will become supposedly more valuable, and go up probably 50% or more. Our reaction chains, which currently rely on cadmium as well as promo and dispro, may become significantly less profitable as a result of this. Way to go CCP. Fail. Way to boost the huge entities with massive space (the potential logistical headaches will be offset by the additional revenue they will undoubtedly see to holding a significant number of the mid end moons already that they may start to mine now) and mess with the little guy that doesnĘt want to deal with those politics.
|
Vampir3 Un3xist
Vampir3 Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 22:02:00 -
[100]
Edited by: Vampir3 Un3xist on 27/10/2008 22:05:09 Edited by: Vampir3 Un3xist on 27/10/2008 22:02:04 Why not allowing moon mining in high sec for those who have a standing of 9 (or more) with the npc faction that have the sovereignty ? Or also as a penalty you must give a certain amount of the raw to the npc faction. |
|
El'essar Viocragh
Minmatar Meltd0wn iPOD Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 22:08:00 -
[101]
How do you control worth?
(a) you inject a fixed supply and simply make it rarer (b) you have potentially unlimited supply, so you make sure it gets used up more compared to similar ressources (think tags + Lp store)
Dysp+Prom are so incredibly out of whack because they are not only among the rarest of a fixed supply, but additionally also one of the most common used up (if you break down a tech 2 ships into its moon minerals and compare absolute amounts).
You've just seeded another region with Arkanor, without realizing that a single Megathron needing 1'000'000 Megacyte is wrong (t1 analogy).
Your "fix" raises the bar on the limited supply in best case scenarios, but still leaves it fixed. Essentially, nothing changed.
Hooray? |
zacuis
Great Big Research
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 22:25:00 -
[102]
this change is simply rubbish is it april 1st ?
why u havnt made the blatantly obvious change to balance out the need for dyspro and prom making thulium and neodyspro used more is completely beyond me.
im not gonna make this post any longer cos everything has been said by others before me.
im just registaring my disbelief.
i pray this is a bad joke
|
fiber0pti
Dark Knights of Deneb Against ALL Authorities
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 22:49:00 -
[103]
So any ccp comment on why the moon products involved surged massively by up to 4x usual volume the day BEFORE the blog ? |
SencneS
Amarr Rebellion Against big Irreversible Dinks
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 22:57:00 -
[104]
Take away all the hostility there is a major problem that would happen if this took place..
By your own example Cadmium can be used to make Ferrofluid.. However Cadmium is also used to make Prometium, which is an ingredient into Ferrogel.
So to make the material usable in it's Ferrogel form you'll have effectively raised the price of Cadmium, which could raise the price of Prometium which could raise the price of Ferrogel.
Who cares if you can make Ferrofluid another way, you're using material that goes directly into other simple reactions that go to make the complex reactions that you're trying to decrease price..
Introduce 6 new moon minerals and pepper them on the moons that have NO minerals on them and this would solve the problem. Creating demand on cheaper material will only serve to raise the overall price of everything.
Amarr for Life |
Treelox
Amarr Market Jihadist Revolutionary Party
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 23:00:00 -
[105]
Originally by: fiber0pti So any ccp comment on why the moon products involved surged massively by up to 4x usual volume the day BEFORE the blog ?
That is because zulupark hinted at this blog and what it would contain this past weekend in his QnA thread in GD. Market speculators took the hint to attempt to make some quick iskies. --
|
Gnulpie
Minmatar Miner Tech
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 23:04:00 -
[106]
Why don't you just add a (random-)distribution of moon materials based on the currently existing materials at each moon plus the general rarity of moon materials instead?
This way every non-dys moon would contain at least 1-2% dys (in cases that you get very lucky with the random distribution it might be even 5%) compared to the usual 80% of a full-dys moon then? If dys-price would rise far to high, people could easily switch their pos to mine dys.
I suggested this idea with more depth and better examples in at least two major threads about moon-mining, no reply about it ever ... and now this crap!
Either do it right or don't do it!
Alchemy *sigh* What next? Elves? And if you really would want such a (borked) change, couldn't you just have it named nucleosynthesis instead?
Besides, what is the goal? To lower t2 costs? This change will INCREASE t2 costs. Why? Because the bulk materials will get much more expensive. So you have maybe 5% reduced costs in the few, expensive materials but you have 50% more costs in the bulk materials. Makes no sense. The much increased demand for pos' will increase pos fuel also which will add even more costs.
I don't know, but this all is not well thought in depth.
Please, can't you just take more time and do better? Look at my ideas for example with the random-distribution of all materials on all moons...
|
RedMage
Black Rabbits
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 23:39:00 -
[107]
It's good to see so many players in Eve with Economics and Finance training. Yeah it's why i picked this game too.
As I mentioned before, this will have an impact on pos/fuel prices and low end moon mins will come more in line of 20:1 of the high end. The t2 prices wont drop, the high end min prices wont drop.
But more small industrial corps might start to make these mins for self production since they can.
I believe this mechanism is more of another faucet to help reduce eve inflation rather than the fix some ppl thought it would be.
All I know is, more ppl will have -1 defense and +1 moon miner, and i'll be bringing +5 pos popping geddons to take advantage. Hows that for externalities.
|
Captain Agemman
Minmatar Legio Ultra
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 23:44:00 -
[108]
Originally by: Gnulpie Alchemy *sigh* What next? Elves? And if you really would want such a (borked) change, couldn't you just have it named nucleosynthesis instead?
Alchmey is actually a good title, because Alchemy is all about making people think you turned lead into gold without actually knowing how to do it |
Typhado3
Minmatar Ashen Lion Mining and Production Consortium Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.10.27 23:54:00 -
[109]
I was thinking of something like this not to long ago however my idea was different I was thinking making it possible to convert any of the minerals into any other of the minerals. possibly even add some skills a alchemy chemical factory and what not. |
Nomakai Delateriel
Amarr Shadow Company Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 00:20:00 -
[110]
It's a short term fix, but it's still a fix I think.
I'd say that Dysprosium will drop in price, and if it doesn't then CCP have implemented a way that they can easily manipulate the dysprosium prices (simply increase the refining yield of unrefined ferrofluid and adjust the hafnium use). Not so sure about Promethium, but it might. Of course both Dysprosium&promethium will still be valuable (at least as valuable as 20xcadmium+production costs) but it will be less of a "money coming out of my behind at a minimum of effort".
It might also stall the current "super-coalitions" as promethium&dysprosium is a major engine in allowing each side to produce carriers&supercapitals like there is no tomorrow. I wouldn't bet on that though. Less funds diverted to the major 0.0 alliances through moon mining = less capitals available for use, which means that it's easier for alliances without dysprosium moons to claim them).
Overall, thumbs up from me. Not a perfect fix. Not even a great fix, but still an improvement over the status quo. |
|
A Sinner
THE MuPPeT FaCTOrY
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 00:23:00 -
[111]
dyspro and promethium prices going down ? \o/ BOB nerf |
Nomakai Delateriel
Amarr Shadow Company Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 00:30:00 -
[112]
Originally by: A Sinner dyspro and promethium prices going down ? \o/ BOB nerf
BoB isn't the only one that are getting hit by this. For example Red Alliance have been all the way to Black Rise and Cloud Ring to capture promethium&dysprosium moons.
If it works as intended it's a boost for the little guy and nerf for the big 0.0 empires. Which is a good thing. ______________________________________________ -My respect can not be won, only lost. It's given freely and only grudgingly withdrawn. |
Chiralos
Epitoth Fleetyards
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 00:32:00 -
[113]
Originally by: Ryuga VonRhaiden
A dyspro (or whatever) moon has a limited amount of a given resource (say, enough for 3 to 6 months extraction, at random). Each time it is exhausted (or very near to exhaustion, say 3-7 days worth of minerals), another resource of the same kind and a random amount spawns elsewhere in the region. It will also simulate the natural exhaustion of resources, and discovery of new deposits, as in real economy.
CCP would then have a better direct control over the resource, adding more resources as the playerbase grows, at pre-fixed intervals (it could be N rare minerals, N*Y uncommon, N*Z common per 20.000 active subscribers, automatically adding or removing respawns as the playerbase changes, so the amount of resources would automatically adjoust in a 3 to 6 months span.
Also, prospecting would be a viable profession (so you could be able to sell information), as there would always be possibilities to find rare resources (now AFAIK there are no undiscovered rare mineral moons).
This is the way forward (possibly in combination of the "inefficient alchemy" approach described in the dev blog). I mean, why go to the bother of putting in a whole moon prospecting apparatus if its a one-off game ?
Amarr Victor. |
Madscience
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 00:52:00 -
[114]
a balance way to do this would be to introduce a new intermediat reaction from bottom up. like rarity 16 rxn will produce some rarity 32, 32 rarity rxn to 64 and so on.
|
Redback911
Malevolent Intentions Divine Anarchy
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 01:18:00 -
[115]
Although I'm no fan of the 0.0 blobfests, this is one of the stupidest solutions to a problem I've seen CCP come up with yet.
This is the same as removal of static complexes. You are removing things worth fighting over. Static resources are one of Eve's main selling points imo, stop removing em!!! |
Sasha Kai
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 01:28:00 -
[116]
All this will acomplish is a redistribution of wealth towards people who own rarity 16 and rarity 32 moons.
This will in effect place higher demand on rare 16's and to rare 32's, resources that are already getting scarce.
The out come will be Dyp and Prom raw materials decreasing in value, but still retaing a > 20:1 value over rarity 16's (taking into account extra reaction towers to manufacture them) Rarity 16's will increase in value, as the resource needs to be distributed over a broader range of reactions. Rarity 32's will increase in value as more players need the resource to react with the alternative source of high ends
the over all effect will be high end composites are reduced in value to a certain extent, but low end composites will increase in value, along with mid end to a certain extent. the over all effect will be build cost for T2 remaining the same of increasing.
Greyscale did hit one thing on the head however: as more players come into the game and more players achieve skills to fly/build T2, demand increases for the resource and prices rise. This solution dosnt address this issue. All it does is redistributes the wealth/pressure onto other resources, which are also finite, and will now have a much greater application.
I cannot see this working effectivley as it is based on moving production to a common resource, which is still finite, but increasing the amount needed by 20:1. Unless CCP plans on cedeing more Raity 16's, the market will react with higher prices.
Not only this, Its placing more emphisis on POS, which in turn leads to more POS warfare, which most people do not find a fun part of the game. Although these are not the sweeping changes some would have hoped for (thank god!), they will do little but redistribute some wealth. If this is what you want to achieve, then fine, but it dosnt address supply and demand issues for fintie resources.
A better change would have been substituting or creating a new reaction to replace one or two of the dypsorium based reactions, using Neodymium and the greatly underutilised Thulium, to make some of the high end composites. This would reduce pressure on Dypsorium and promethium, and in turn reduce the value of these minerals, by increasing the value on the other two rarity 64's, theoreically by a factor of 2:1, without placing undue pressure on low ends. Rarity 64's should be fought over and owned by large corps/alliances.
Flame away...
|
Marcus Druallis
Quantum Industries RAZOR Alliance
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 01:32:00 -
[117]
I like it. Ideally it won't really be used much, but in cases when dypro prices get too high you can make some quick cash doing this. --
|
Jason Edwards
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 01:33:00 -
[118]
Edited by: Jason Edwards on 28/10/2008 01:33:24 So while this is all fine and dandy to the common folk who have no interests in moon mining.
What this does is actually puts a limit of the potential higher value of these rare moons. Essentially hurting those with these moons; potentially speaking.
As I suspect Tech 3 will use tech 2... so tech 3 literally would push significant higher demand for tech2; which in turn places high demand on the moon minerals. Driving up the price.
Which kind of hurts the value of 0.0 though potentially this also drives up the value of the common minerals and the 0.0 people could also moonmine that for decent profit.
So in a way it kind of pushes the 0.0 to moonmine the other resources available. ------------------------ "There was this bright flash of light - and now this egg shaped thing is on my screen - did I level up?" |
Nomakai Delateriel
Amarr Shadow Company Axiom Empire
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 01:33:00 -
[119]
Originally by: Redback911 This is the same as removal of static complexes. You are removing things worth fighting over. Static resources are one of Eve's main selling points imo, stop removing em!!!
[sarcasm]Right. People will suddenly stop fighting over dysprosium moons just because they're in a worst case scenario only worth 20 times a Cadmium moon (more considering that it costs just as much to fuel a cadmium POS as it costs to fuel a dysprosium POS). Thus only capable of financing about 2 carriers per month instead of 6 of them.[/sarcasm]
And that said, people in this game fight because they want to fight. If it's not over moons, it's over ratting turf, bragging/e-peen waving rights. ______________________________________________ -My respect can not be won, only lost. It's given freely and only grudgingly withdrawn. |
Vigilant
Gallente Vigilant's Vigilante's
|
Posted - 2008.10.28 02:59:00 -
[120]
Edited by: Vigilant on 28/10/2008 03:00:05 Can I get some moon mining beams for my Hulk now
Edit: That I can use in High Sec too would be nice
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |