| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 6 post(s) |
TrulyKosh
Gallente
Solo for UNCLE
   |
Posted - 2008.10.30 17:38:00 -
[181]
Edited by: TrulyKosh on 30/10/2008 17:38:40
Alternative suggestion:
Let all moons keep the minerals they have at the moment.
However, add smaller quantities of every mineral to every moon.
Instead of making a new reaction that is 20 times less efficient, give every moon 1/20, i.e. 5 units/hour of dysprosium that can be mined.
You'd simply increase supply without creating logistic nightmares for those interested in running inferior alchemy reactions.
|
Vigilant
Gallente
Vigilant's Vigilante's
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 18:21:00 -
[182]
That will upset the dispo "cartel" :p
|
Aganola
Amarr
Hungarian Riflemen Regiment
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 20:15:00 -
[183]
 Originally by: Chribba
Gold gold gold!
I belive you'll be changing from veldspar to gold then??? :D
|
Aprudena Gist
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 23:12:00 -
[184]
Originally by: Vigilant
That will upset the dispo "cartel" :p
the dyspo "cartel" will just be forced to take all these moons too v0v.
|
Keith F
Caldari
United ALT Forces
|
Posted - 2008.10.30 23:55:00 -
[185]
May not be relevent but what about giving research agents, or bring in new agents a new job.
Reverse engineering.
The ability to refine objects back to their original components ie
L1 = 1 step in the build process backwards,
L2 = 2steps, etc
These agents would only be needed in stations with a refinery and if you have the skills needed it would be an option to select in the recycle panel,any agent can revert a object back to basics, but needs several cycles to do it and gets lower quantities per skill level.
This way all components can be recycled and reused, thus allowing RARE moon mins to be FOUND in smaller quantities by all players.
But the percentage being skill driven, may make these quantities expensive as you lose the value of each componant at each level.
This would also mean a new SALVAGE ship or Salvager II would need to be built(or Both) that lets you Salvage Wrecks back to their components as well as salvage loot.
|
Dark water
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 06:26:00 -
[186]
so why not redistribute the raw minerals.. we all know that the minerals in 0.0 need to be reset anyway.
the large alliances have sov in most parts where the good minerals are and the new alliances don't have a chance to get into the market.
and why not go ahead and bring out the planet side?
mining on planets and giving the ability to get minerals that can sub for what we are using to build with??
and if you are not ready for us to go planet side then open planets up for pos and give a new mining structure for the pos so as to be able to mine some of the minerals from space??
you will need a docking ring for planet side anyway so go ahead and start by letting us put up towers for now or come out with a new tower called the docking rings have 4 sizes small to extra large so as to be able to handle the different size operation that can be built there??
their are all kinds of ways to solve the problem it just takes you to implement them..
|
Tomic
The Illuminati.
Pandemic Legion
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 14:13:00 -
[187]
This sounds like an epic waste of time to me. This is just a CCP ploy to sell loads more control towers to sink a bit more isk. POS fuel is gonna sky rocket, about time it got seperate fuel from capitals tbh.
|
s73v3n2k
Caldari
UK Corp
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 15:07:00 -
[188]
I don't see what all the whining is about tbh. Economically this is a sound idea and will have the desired effect of removing a bottlekneck in the current system.
Currently the cost of the high end minerals is causing a slowing down of the production of T2 items and that cost is not demend related but is an artificial cost derived by few who control the market.
What CCP isn't going to do is provide an option to mine more from those same moons like T2 harvesters etc as this will have no effect because its an artificially created cost. What CCP therefore have done is provided another way create those same materials with larger quantities of lower end materials.
what This will do is increase the demand for the lower end materials making them probably more valuable than they are but they have set a ceiling to the cost of the high end materials value and thats 20 times the value of the low end materials.
All in all its good for everyone in the moon mining and T2 manufacturing business because demand and production will increase creating a more fluent less controllable market.
This doesn't mean the high end moons become worthless because even at half their current value they produce more than enough income for the alliances who control them.
|
Dark water
|
Posted - 2008.10.31 17:56:00 -
[189]
Edited by: Dark water on 31/10/2008 17:57:09
i agree it is a good idea and will help out a lot i was just looking or i should say pointing out that we have tons of options that can be accessed.
we just need to look into them .
i for one am more willing to do more moon mining now with this change.. But ..
if we could start with planet side operations i would not even slow down to see if the coast was clear before i jumped out to the planet and started setting up.
i was hoping that with planet side coming soon or hoping it would be soon that we would have a new market of minerals to mine..
look at it in rl .. planets have a lot more minerals to offer then moons.
so it only makes sense that that would be the way we would move if we were really out there.
i know this is just a game but think how much fun it would be to be able to set up on a planet.. and that would or could be set up and help out with the strain on the mineral markets.. or even make way for new minerals that could be for new better items or that could be subed for other minerals to offset the cost a little and make things a little more interesting.
it can be done and it can open up a lot more for us all we have to do is get it underway.
|
kan han
Gallente
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 11:34:00 -
[190]
It is so funny to see how serious the devs talk about this entirelly fully virtual and therefore non-existing market. They try to scrap real life BS concecpts and strap them over the ingame mechanics sothat they look like that there would be a market. That infact is ok for a game, but come on, you are just manipulating some numbers and not re-inventing the wheel.
First of all the market in eve consist of a never-ending stream of virtual goods coming out of nothing. If you need to get the market working and in action, let it crash like in the real world. Degrade ingame ISK sothat prices explode. Give it some spicy hot ideas instead of nerfing this or that number wether it is a property of a ship or of a procudtion or refining process. I wanna see some action soon. Why don't you destroy complete systems with all the goods in it? Why not just hitting one of the biggest alliances so much hurting very hard, that they scream because of loosing all they had? Wouldn't that drive much more action to the market and the whole game itself?
|
|
|
Eve Goetterdaemmerung
|
Posted - 2008.11.01 11:49:00 -
[191]
I think this just makes everything more complicated, but it might work because it directs price pressure from the rare raw minerals to some of the common raw minerals. On the other hand my experience in EvE is, the more complicated things are the easier it is to make money with them
But actually the problem is that we have an increasing number of players, but not an increasing number supply (moons with minerals). So to get this alligned you need to add more low sec space and/or more moons with minerals.
Did anyone check the market price of the mentioned common raw minerals? Exactly since the day of this Dev Blog they jumped to double. What do you think will happen when the patch day comes closer
Eve G.
|
Vengal Seyhan
Sten Industries
|
Posted - 2008.11.02 11:33:00 -
[192]
Originally by: CCP Fallout
(Snipped Commentary about CCP GreyscaleÆs blog)
I've been watching the moon mineral market lately and it's been pretty fail.
For example : Solerium in Jita currently costs less than the underlying ingredients. There is no point in making it vs selling the components. Caesium, an R32 mineral, is significantly cheaper than Chromium or Cadmium. Caesium seems to be the next Thulium.
This idea isn't great because it imposed immense stress on chromium and cadmium supplies, while it doesn't impact on the R64s that are currently underutilised.
Some good alternative ideas and points have been raised in this thread:
- 20 : 1 is excessive. It means your fixed cost of production on a medium POS goes from about 375ISK per unit to about 7500 ISK / unit for the reactions (these costs drawn from our own simple POS operations). 10:1 is
- Your current scheme introduces the need to refine down your crude ferrofluid. This will presumably need an extra module and at least two ouput silos, which will fill at differential rates. This means that you have an increased time burden for maintenance, and have to run a bigger POS to sustain the CPU.
- Introducing even small amounts of moon minerals to be found in Magnetometric sites would break the monopoly market to some extent, and would be dynamic and reactive to player effort. It'd also buff exploration, and mag sites, which have always been sub-par in my opinion. It would also create a global buying market for moon minerals, so that other market hubs might start seeing some minerals buy orders, other than just Jita.
(I think this is an awesome idea TBH!)
- Allow people to combine 2 low end materials (eg Gas) and a mid-end material (Metal) to make a high end material. Alternatively, use a low and two mid ends, so people can't all in on at their POS very commonly. Eliminate the current moon minerals choke point by partly shifting it to the bottom floor!
- Introduce reaction schemes that use the two under-valued R64 materials!
- Introduce 6 new moon minerals for these reactions and bias them to spawning on moons that have have NO valuable minerals on them.
- Allowing people to moon mine in high sec with an extremely high sec status. Tax this heavily (eg 90% tax), to control abundance. I foresee people will control supply by war deccing 1 player corps to smash their POS operations because they're valuable and vulnerable.
- Change the names of the new intermediate materals, for pity's sake. 'Unrefined XXX' is just lazy.
Any of these ideas has benefits compared to the one proposed.
If you're keen on opening up an invention and creativity style mechanic, all of the above ideas should be implemented (unless proved to be game-breakingly unbalanced).
Cheers
|
Tammaria Snegallja
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 00:15:00 -
[193]
One idea to reduce the fuel costs on those alchemy reactions:
Don't make it reaction, but blueprints (maybe blueprints that have to be invented) that can only be used in a Rorqual.
|
Vio Geraci
Amarr
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.03 05:15:00 -
[194]
Edited by: Vio Geraci on 03/11/2008 05:16:45
Originally by: Vengal Seyhan
I've been watching the moon mineral market lately and it's been pretty fail. For example : Solerium in Jita currently costs less than the underlying ingredients. There is no point in making it vs selling the components. Caesium, an R32 mineral, is significantly cheaper than Chromium or Cadmium. Caesium seems to be the next Thulium.
A lot of the moon mineral and component market is going to be screwed up because of speculation having to do with this next patch. A few months from now it will settle down, but in the meantime people will get confused and think that the weird prices are the problem CCP is trying to fix, or that the moons being profitable or too controlled by a cartel. None of these is the problem, the problem is that the moon mineral mechanic does not scale well with the increasing size of the game. Only a method to transform labor into moon minerals will do that.
Quote:
- 20 : 1 is excessive. It means your fixed cost of production on a medium POS goes from about 375ISK per unit to about 7500 ISK / unit for the reactions (these costs drawn from our own simple POS operations). 10:1 is
They probably want to not influence the market too much at first, but see if it affects it or not. I bet the ratios will get better over the next six months, so long as there isn't a huge enough price spike to make the 20:1 ratio profitable.
Quote:
- Introducing even small amounts of moon minerals to be found in Magnetometric sites would break the monopoly market to some extent, and would be dynamic and reactive to player effort. It'd also buff exploration, and mag sites, which have always been sub-par in my opinion. It would also create a global buying market for moon minerals, so that other market hubs might start seeing some minerals buy orders, other than just Jita.
(I think this is an awesome idea TBH!)
Thanks!
I would hope that CCP had those sites be more prominent in "good moon space" and not just smeared all over the map, though. As you may be aware, some regions have better moons than others, just like some have better minerals or rats. Or perhaps only have them in COSMOS constellation gravimetric sites, at first, to test their impact on the market.
Quote:
- Introduce reaction schemes that use the two under-valued R64 materials! [/
It would be neat if we could devise something for them to be good for, even if it wasn't as chokingly overvalued as Dysp and Prom.
Quote:
- Introduce 6 new moon minerals for these reactions and bias them to spawning on moons that have have NO valuable minerals on them.
That wouldn't make as much difference as you think. The new moons would probably be divided among 0.0 alliances in roughly the proportions that the old moons are.
Quote:
- Allowing people to moon mine in high sec with an extremely high sec status. Tax this heavily (eg 90% tax), to control abundance. I foresee people will control supply by war deccing 1 player corps to smash their POS operations because they're valuable and vulnerable.
I hope they never do this, because it would be a complete gimme for empire people, one could not use capitals against the easily fueled POS, and moon minerals are one of the very few areas in which empire depends on 0.0.
|
Vigilant
Gallente
Vigilant's Vigilante's
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 14:59:00 -
[195]
Originally by: Vio Geraci
Edited by: Vio Geraci on 03/11/2008 05:16:45
Originally by: Vengal Seyhan
I've been watching the moon mineral market lately and it's been pretty fail. For example : Solerium in Jita currently costs less than the underlying ingredients. There is no point in making it vs selling the components. Caesium, an R32 mineral, is significantly cheaper than Chromium or Cadmium. Caesium seems to be the next Thulium.
A lot of the moon mineral and component market is going to be screwed up because of speculation having to do with this next patch. A few months from now it will settle down, but in the meantime people will get confused and think that the weird prices are the problem CCP is trying to fix, or that the moons being profitable or too controlled by a cartel. None of these is the problem, the problem is that the moon mineral mechanic does not scale well with the increasing size of the game. Only a method to transform labor into moon minerals will do that.
Quote:
- 20 : 1 is excessive. It means your fixed cost of production on a medium POS goes from about 375ISK per unit to about 7500 ISK / unit for the reactions (these costs drawn from our own simple POS operations). 10:1 is
They probably want to not influence the market too much at first, but see if it affects it or not. I bet the ratios will get better over the next six months, so long as there isn't a huge enough price spike to make the 20:1 ratio profitable.
Quote:
- Introducing even small amounts of moon minerals to be found in Magnetometric sites would break the monopoly market to some extent, and would be dynamic and reactive to player effort. It'd also buff exploration, and mag sites, which have always been sub-par in my opinion. It would also create a global buying market for moon minerals, so that other market hubs might start seeing some minerals buy orders, other than just Jita.
(I think this is an awesome idea TBH!)
Thanks!
I would hope that CCP had those sites be more prominent in "good moon space" and not just smeared all over the map, though. As you may be aware, some regions have better moons than others, just like some have better minerals or rats. Or perhaps only have them in COSMOS constellation gravimetric sites, at first, to test their impact on the market.
Quote:
- Introduce reaction schemes that use the two under-valued R64 materials! [/
It would be neat if we could devise something for them to be good for, even if it wasn't as chokingly overvalued as Dysp and Prom.
Quote:
- Introduce 6 new moon minerals for these reactions and bias them to spawning on moons that have have NO valuable minerals on them.
That wouldn't make as much difference as you think. The new moons would probably be divided among 0.0 alliances in roughly the proportions that the old moons are.
Quote:
- Allowing people to moon mine in high sec with an extremely high sec status. Tax this heavily (eg 90% tax), to control abundance. I foresee people will control supply by war deccing 1 player corps to smash their POS operations because they're valuable and vulnerable.
I hope they never do this, because it would be a complete gimme for empire people, one could not use capitals against the easily fueled POS, and moon minerals are one of the very few areas in which empire depends on 0.0.
WellVio I guess we will see what happens patch drops on the 11th without any of our input being well received :(
|
Driven
Caldari
Mass Produced
Venturi Starea
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 21:46:00 -
[196]
1) Its an incremental improvement - better than the status quo - but it feels rather short-sighted and ad hoc at best.
2) I would have prefered it if you had allowed additionally for use of the really low end crappy mins as well - atmos, evap etc so they actually have a real use, and not so much on the already impacted mid-range cadmium and chromium which will instantly be more valuable than neo or thul.
3) If you are going to screw around with things like this be aware that its a royal pain in the ass to re-configure spreadsheets all the time and account for the extra variables.
I think in this case you guys really aren't allowing those of us who actually do a sizable amount of reactions to give you some feedback on sisi before you just toss this into our laps live on TQ. We're not lab rats or something and this ought not to be an experiment where you "see what happens" and then make it up as you go, which is fundamentally what the dev response was.
You should have already thought through steps 2 and beyond. Making it up as you go is for WoW - or it ought to be.
I need a sig |
Driven
Caldari
Mass Produced
Venturi Starea
|
Posted - 2008.11.04 22:09:00 -
[197]
And, by the way, when do you plan to seed these new reactions on Sisi? They do not seem to be available anywhere I have looked.
I need a sig |
Vio Geraci
Amarr
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 06:31:00 -
[198]
Unless I misunderstood, the developer reply in this thread seems to imply that you can't refine the product at a POS --it must take place at a station. So the hidden cost you indicated is replaced by transportation costs, as well as a dependence on friendly stations. See http://www.eve-search.com/thread/908394/page/all#150 for what I'm talking about.
|
Dzon Vejn
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 11:52:00 -
[199]
Low-end minerals (like silicates, hydrocarbon, evaporite deposits, etc.) should also get chance to produce medium-level minerals (like platinum for example).
Because 99.9% mid-level moons are already occupied, which means that they will only (possibly?) provide more profite for their owners, while you still wouldn't be able to do anything with low-end minerals.
|
Malarkey
Minmatar
Twisted Creations
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 11:56:00 -
[200]
I understand the problems and the issues, especially as I am a specialist T2 invention manufacturer. However, I think this particular solution is over-complicated, by far.
A much simpler solution would have been to lift the bar on moon mining from 0.3 systems to 0.4 systems. It would have increased supply of moons and brought conflict closer to Empire, helping to bridge that gap between high-sec and null-sec.
|
|
|
JanSVK
|
Posted - 2008.11.05 13:25:00 -
[201]
dysprosium: 40300 isk/unit
cadmium: 2290 isk/unit
With 1:20 ration -> 2290*20 = 45800
You loose 5500 isk/unit just on the input materials.
We not finished yet 
1x L POS = 193 000 isk/ hour.
Large POS can support 2 simple reactors.
193 000 (POS fuel cost/Hour) / 20 (produced ferrofluid/hour) = 9650 isk/unit.
Total production costs: 45800 + 9650 = 55450
55450 - 40300 = 15150 isk/unit loss !!!
And these are only the pure material and fuel costs.
Conclusion: Alchemy is not worth it.
I would like to know what CCP thinks the right price for 1 unit of dysprosium created with alchemy should be with current market.
That is: Cost of input material + POS fuel + hauling and POS management costs.
|
Rotti
|
Posted - 2008.11.06 10:55:00 -
[202]
Originally by: JanSVK
dysprosium: 40300 isk/unit
cadmium: 2290 isk/unit
With 1:20 ration -> 2290*20 = 45800
You loose 5500 isk/unit just on the input materials.
We not finished yet
1x L POS = 193 000 isk/ hour.
Large POS can support 2 simple reactors.
193 000 (POS fuel cost/Hour) / 20 (produced ferrofluid/hour) = 9650 isk/unit.
Total production costs: 45800 + 9650 = 55450
55450 - 40300 = 15150 isk/unit loss !!!
Well we have see a big increase in the cost of cadmium since this was announced, it used to be at 800 pu and now over 2k
Working with your figures but at 800 pu I get a cost of ferrofluid at 25650 which is about 15k less the market value atm. There was always going to be a increase in cadmium price as speculators waded in on the market, however i think this will stabalize once the patch is released and more people start to moon mining these often over-looked moons
|
sparroth
|
Posted - 2008.11.06 11:42:00 -
[203]
How 'bout adding something cool to exploration, like the ability to scan down "comets" or something w/ grav probes. They would be a "mini moon" not attached to a planet that is only around for a couple months. Long enough to be worth setting up a POS at, but not permanent so CCP can adjust their rate of spawn to balance the economy.
It would go something like "guy scans down a grav site in system X, turns out to be a comet instead of a normal hidden belt. Guy grabs some survey probes and sees what the comet will yield (and how long it will be around) decides it's worth setting up a POS to mine knowing he will have to take it back down in a couple months, or decides to just leave it for someone else to find.
|
BlondieBC
Minmatar
7th Tribal Legion
|
Posted - 2008.11.06 18:13:00 -
[204]
Originally by: Aprudena Gist
Originally by: Vigilant
That will upset the dispo "cartel" :p
the dyspo "cartel" will just be forced to take all these moons too v0v.
Now that will be a fun war. Looking at some moon scans, looks like geminate region is now a much better region. Solar front will enjoy fighting for the moons.
|
BlondieBC
Minmatar
7th Tribal Legion
|
Posted - 2008.11.06 18:23:00 -
[205]
Simpler solution. Why not add moon mins to hauler spawns?
|
Karo Tsakkatoa
|
Posted - 2008.11.07 12:55:00 -
[206]
Alchemy??
What will be next? Herbalism and Jewelcrafting?
____________________
|
Vio Geraci
Amarr
GoonFleet
GoonSwarm
|
Posted - 2008.11.07 20:31:00 -
[207]
Originally by: sparroth
How 'bout adding something cool to exploration, like the ability to scan down "comets" or something w/ grav probes. They would be a "mini moon" not attached to a planet that is only around for a couple months. Long enough to be worth setting up a POS at, but not permanent so CCP can adjust their rate of spawn to balance the economy.
It would go something like "guy scans down a grav site in system X, turns out to be a comet instead of a normal hidden belt. Guy grabs some survey probes and sees what the comet will yield (and how long it will be around) decides it's worth setting up a POS to mine knowing he will have to take it back down in a couple months, or decides to just leave it for someone else to find.
Brilliant idea.
|
s73v3n2k
Caldari
UK Corp
Mostly Harmless
|
Posted - 2008.11.09 10:59:00 -
[208]
i too have done the math on this and wonder what ccp added it for because you actually make a loss on buying the raw materials for the reaction before you even add pos fuel costs to do the reactions.
Am i missing something here?
prometium example
using prometium as an example under the new system i would need 100 cadmium and 100 chromium to make myself 100 unrefined prometium. I then would need to take that unrefined prometium and refine it which will give me 10 prometium
so it cost me 780k to make 10 prometium at current market prices so 78k per unit for something which is currently selling for 13.5k on the market
dysporite example
630k to produce 10 units so 63k per unit and it sells for 42.3k
so i think ccp need to rework there numbers because as i understand it this doesn't actually work.
|
Grimsbor
|
Posted - 2008.11.10 17:04:00 -
[209]
I think the name Alchemy should be changed to Chemistry. Alchemy is an ancient tradition full of superstition and occult beliefs, something I think doesn't have any place in the enlightened universe of EVE.
|
Backdaft
|
Posted - 2008.11.12 08:18:00 -
[210]
Um, so what's the real scoop?
I thought 100 min#1 + 100 min#2 = 100 unrefined.
Then refine that to get 10 refined + 95% of min#2 returned
So then why am I looking at the info on the new reactions and it's saying 100 + 100 = 1 unrefined.
Huh? I've heard of ludicrous speed, does this qualify as ludicrous alchemy? That isn't 20:1 that's more like 200:1, isn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |