open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked CCP, does it feel good to waste a lot of your developer time ?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 ... : last (18)

Author Topic

Mirime Nolwe
APOCALYPSE LEGION
Posted - 2009.06.04 14:58:00 - [361]
 

Originally by: Evelgrivion
Some interesting statistics for this thread (courtesy of Chribba):

Top 15 posters:
Akita T: 67
Astria Tiphareth: 9
Gnulpie: 9
5pinDizzy: 8
THE L0CK: 7
Tralalaa: 6
Durzel: 6
Kateryne: 5
logeoff now: 5
Malcanis: 5
Yakia TovilToba: 5
Joe: 4
Tsual: 4
Teras Menac: 3
Soporo: 3

Akita T, if you're looking for some more people to pay attention to your complaints, feel free to join #eve-pub on the Coldfront IRC network (irc.coldfront.net). The channel could use a bit more "lively" conversation... Wink


And you might have some alts in there.. But well, 70 posts are more then enough to see that in most part its just trolling and attentionwhoring.

I have read all posts in this thread and i still believe that Akita have some serious issues accepting that he might be wrong, even with all the arguments from experienced people he refuses to see that Mission profit is nothing compared with Lowsec activities. Nothing wrong with other people knowing and having more experience then us, its just the way things are and we will only improve when we accept that. This works in game but also in our life.

Game wise you know more then me but im sure that some people that posted in here know more then you, just because you dont know how to handle the resources in lowsec and nullsec dont mean that the rest dont know. So if people do billions of game currency in those areas I dont see the problem in some carebears enjoying the game their way, because the profit its nothing compared with the real isk income in low/nullsec.

The argument of mission big profit is lost and now the issue is the Solo part of missions. Sure, Industry and trading in Highsec needs a lot of team effort and risk right? Probably, I really dont know, im just a noob..





Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:06:00 - [362]
 

Originally by: Mirime Nolwe
refuses to see that Mission profit is nothing compared with Lowsec activities

I never disputed you can make higher AMOUNTS of ISK per hour in many different ways, if you hit no problems.
I was merely pointing out, repeatedly, and mostly to deaf ears, that INCOME does not equal PROFIT.
When you talk profit, you talk income primarily (both the easily quantifiable ISK/loot/salvage/etc, but also the enjoyment derived), sure, but then you also factor in effort of all kinds (teamwork, time, attention, stress) and various expenses due to factors within or outside your control (like, say, ship losses in transits, ambushes, whatever).

So, yes, lowsec activities may pay more, but highsec L4s are more profitable/lucrative/whatever-word-you-like-to-use for far too many people after you take all factors into consideration.

Traidor Disloyal
Private Nuisance
Segregati0n
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:19:00 - [363]
 

Originally by: Akita T
The painful way (most people cry would mean an end to EVE-Online - I disagree, but, hey, what do I know) would be to drastically cut L4 highsec profitability.
The other would be to boost rewards for everything else.

I have read on these forums that Trading is far more profitable then level 4 missions. I have read that people can actually make more isk while in a station without undocking then level 4 mission runners can.

Granted it does take more then hitting F1-F8 to make that isk. But it is far more profitable or so I have read.

Mirime Nolwe
APOCALYPSE LEGION
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:23:00 - [364]
 

Edited by: Mirime Nolwe on 04/06/2009 15:27:37
Yes, you are right. Profit its not the same as Income, i wanted to say profit = (time spent doing certain activity + risk) x ISK, something along those lines. Im sorry but not everyone its an expert in english.

So.. Missions, are they easy? Yes they are. Are they soloable? Yes they are. Do we get great amounts of ISK? Not really, judging from the rest of game activities missions are just something for the people that dont know how to play EVE and take full advantage of resourses avaiable, people that just want to relax and play for a while, new players to get into the game while they earn something to support themselfs, i think its not needed to keep going, as some people said, everyone have their own playstyle so let them enjoy it.

If Lowsec and 0.0 didnt had several ways to get ridiculous amounts of ISK i would aggree with you.

Edit: You talk about enjoyment, i will have to repeat myself and sorry about that but what you like and take enjoyment from might not be the same that i like or any other person. Is it that hard to understand that?

baltec1
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:27:00 - [365]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: baltec1
WH space/0.0/low sec already offeres way more than you can earn in a high sec level 4, there is no need to boost rewards.

Reality contradicts your statement. If w-space/0.0/lowsec would offer ENOUGH additional rewards (in light of the effort/work/time required) compared to L4 highsec missions, we'd see far more people doing it.
Also, see answer to the first quote of this reply.



I earn more 0.0 ratting than doing high sec missions for no effort at all.

Knopje
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:28:00 - [366]
 

Originally by: Empress Norton
I dont care about your thread and neither does CCP but I did want to comment on this..

you seriously believe that making the game more difficult to get into for new, average players is going to result in more new players?

seriously?


You seriously believe making the game easier will give the old guard an incentive to stay?

Seriously?

Running lvl 4's is too easy a way of making money and it's unacceptable.

Knopje
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:29:00 - [367]
 

Edited by: Knopje on 04/06/2009 15:30:27
Originally by: baltec1
I earn more 0.0 ratting than doing high sec missions for no effort at all.


And this benefits empire miners how? Oh wait, they're stupid industrialists anyway and nobody needs them. I'll just buy my ships from NPC's shall I Rolling Eyes

Drunk Driver
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:30:00 - [368]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Drunk Driver
Risk adverse players will not venture into areas where they can be killed.
You can spew any argument you want and that fact will not change.
Too simple for some to understand it would seem.

Not too simple, just simply wrong.




Nope, not wrong. It's simple truth.

The key here is risk adverse. Some people will not take risks. That's why the mega-boring mmo WoW does so well. Those type of people are also in Eve. They live in Empire. They don't venture into low sec or 0.0 for a reason. They know you're trying to gank them. They will avoid that at any cost.

But hey, you can ignore that fact if you want. The eve community has the final vote on this matter. After six years it looks like they're still voting to stay away from danger.


(Kinda sad really as the best part of the game is getting shot at and shooting back.) Sad

Knopje
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:33:00 - [369]
 

The ignorant selfishness in this thread is ridiculous. You people are so egotistic.

Without industrialists there would be no ships, without them there would be no mods (T2 mainly) and without them you people would be flying in noob ships firing your civilian weaponry.

Grow up a little and learn that this game isn't just about you, it's about everyone.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:33:00 - [370]
 

Originally by: baltec1
I earn more 0.0 ratting than doing high sec missions for no effort at all.

How much you can make or do make is irrelevant.
The fact not enough people do the same means it's not profitable enough after you factor in all other possible things that are relevant, and hence you need to either boost the rewards (advisable), lower the risks or other "entry barriers" (not really a good idea) or decrease the rewards of the alternatives (and then most people that are currently engaged in said activities will scream "bloody murder").
The logical choice is therefore boosting rewards for underused activities - the less people engage in it, the more should the rewards be boosted.

baltec1
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:40:00 - [371]
 

You just dont get it do you?

You can have all the reward you want and it wont change a thing. Some people will never enter a place where they can get shot at by players.

I once got an officer spawn in 0.0 that netted me around 1 billion isk. Honestly how much more reward could you want for 10 minutes work?

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:44:00 - [372]
 

Originally by: Drunk Driver
Some people will not take risks. They will avoid that at any cost.

WRONG. Not at ANY cost.
Take somebody you would consider an utter carebear. Then take something risky, yet still in the realm of possibility, but with huge rewards. Say, something like this...
Have a CCP-guaranteed announcement that he will receive 100 bil ISK if he reaches 10 random 0.0 locations (to be comunicated to him and only to him) in the next 7 days in a single ship.
What would you say, will he take that trip or will he stay home ?
I'm willing to bet you all your ISK that most people you call "carebears" would step up to the challenge.

Quote:
But hey, you can ignore that fact if you want. The eve community has the final vote on this matter. After six years it looks like they're still voting to stay away from danger.

But hey, you can repeatedly ignore the fact that 2++ years ago, back when lowsec mining didn't completely suck yet the percentage of people that actually lived in highsec was pretty damned high compared to today.
It wasn't even an insane level of rewards, it was mining ferchrissakes, and in the belts, where you don't even need to be PROBED FOR, the directional scanner does just fine to catch you too.

The community isn't VOTING to stay out of danger, the community is screaming "do I look stupid enough to go out in the dangerous areas if I can earn more than enough in the complete safety of highsec?"

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:47:00 - [373]
 

Originally by: baltec1
You just dont get it do you? You can have all the reward you want and it wont change a thing. Some people will never enter a place where they can get shot at by players.
I once got an officer spawn in 0.0 that netted me around 1 billion isk. Honestly how much more reward could you want for 10 minutes work?

No, YOU don't get it - if you keep everything ELSE constant, the higher the rewards, the more people do it.
There's no such thing as a "completely risk-averse carebear", there is only such a thing as "not rewarding enough to make him risk it".
It's not an opinion, it's the law.

chrisss0r
The Lowbirds
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:47:00 - [374]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: baltec1
I earn more 0.0 ratting than doing high sec missions for no effort at all.

How much you can make or do make is irrelevant.
The fact not enough people do the same




And "not enough" is measured by what?

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:48:00 - [375]
 

Originally by: chrisss0r
And "not enough" is measured by what?

By the percentage of people doing it.

baltec1
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:49:00 - [376]
 

Ok lets try this from another angle.

I own a nightmare for level 4s. If you nerf level 4s I will continue to use it for only them. If you then boost low sec missions I will still only use it in high sec.

No reward will tempt me to use it in low sec/0.0/ WH.

This is what people are like with their ravens, they do not want to risk losing their ship. This is why dispite being able to earn twice as much as a level 4, people will not enter 0.0/low sec

chrisss0r
The Lowbirds
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:51:00 - [377]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: chrisss0r
And "not enough" is measured by what?

By the percentage of people doing it.



and what is the actual percentage and more important:

by what means is that percentage "too low" ?

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:53:00 - [378]
 

Originally by: baltec1
Ok lets try this from another angle.
I own a nightmare for level 4s. If you nerf level 4s I will continue to use it for only them. If you then boost low sec missions I will still only use it in high sec.
No reward will tempt me to use it in low sec/0.0/ WH.

Absurd counter-example...
What about 100k LP and 150 mil + 150 mil time bonus for the SHABBIEST of L4s (and more than double for the harder ones) on top of insane ISK bounties and loot/salvage if you run it in lowsec 0.4 instead of highsec 0.5 ?
Maybe you won't risk your multi-bil-fit Nightmare in lowsec to do L4s, but you will certainly GO and DO L4s in lowsec, in something cheaper.
You can't honestly tell me you'd rather keep doing L4s in highsec in your Nighthmare, do you ?

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:54:00 - [379]
 

Originally by: chrisss0r
and what is the actual percentage and more important:
by what means is that percentage "too low" ?

Over 80% of people crowded in less than 20% of the space... I'd call that imbalanced by any possible standards.

baltec1
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:55:00 - [380]
 

Edited by: baltec1 on 04/06/2009 16:03:30

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: baltec1
Ok lets try this from another angle.
I own a nightmare for level 4s. If you nerf level 4s I will continue to use it for only them. If you then boost low sec missions I will still only use it in high sec.
No reward will tempt me to use it in low sec/0.0/ WH.

Absurd counter-example...
What about 100k LP and 150 mil + 150 mil time bonus for the SHABBIEST of L4s (and more than double for the harder ones) on top of insane ISK bounties and loot/salvage if you run it in lowsec 0.4 instead of highsec 0.5 ?
Maybe you won't risk your multi-bil-fit Nightmare in lowsec to do L4s, but you will certainly GO and DO L4s in lowsec, in something cheaper.
You can't honestly tell me you'd rather keep doing L4s in highsec in your Nighthmare, do you ?



Yea because that is balanced and wont damage the economy...

Ok lets try another, my alt has a hulk which mines veldspar in high sec. I could make up to ten times more mining in 0.0 but I dont want to risk losing the hulk. So I stick to veldspar.

chrisss0r
The Lowbirds
Posted - 2009.06.04 15:56:00 - [381]
 

Edited by: chrisss0r on 04/06/2009 15:56:55
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: chrisss0r
and what is the actual percentage and more important:
by what means is that percentage "too low" ?

Over 80% of people crowded in less than 20% of the space... I'd call that imbalanced by any possible standards.




why?

the 80 - 20 rule is empirically suprisingly accurate when it comes to terms of cultural interaction.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.04 16:05:00 - [382]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 04/06/2009 16:06:41
Originally by: baltec1
Yea because that is balanced and wont damage the econemy...

What part of "absurd counter-example" was hard to understand ? I was merely making a point that there's no such thing as "more rewards won't help" - the higher the rewards, the more people will go there. If not enough people go there, it's simply because the rewards aren't high enough. You could constantly increase rewards by 1% per day until the ratio of highsec:lowsec dwellers would be closer to the desired one, and stop increasing lowsec rewards (or even decrease them a little at that point).

Originally by: chrisss0r
the 80 - 20 rule is empirically suprisingly accurate when it comes to terms of cultural interaction.

Except that this is a game, and the goal is to have people have fun, not simulate real-life.
This disparity in distribution of people are negatively affecting the server hardware (some solar systems are far too crowded, most are almost completely empty, the ideal situation would see ROUGHLY uniform numbers across most systems in the EVE universe), negatively affecting gameplay enjoyment.
Whenever gameplay clashes with realism, gameplay concerns win over realism.

Originally by: baltec1
Ok lets try another, my alt has a hulk which mines veldspar in high sec. I could make up to ten times more mining in 0.0

Actually, you couldn't.
Arkonor is barely 3 times more profitable than Veldspar, not 10 times more profitable.
And it was one of my points of contentions in this thread.

Drunk Driver
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.06.04 16:05:00 - [383]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Drunk Driver
Some people will not take risks. They will avoid that at any cost.

WRONG. Not at ANY cost.
Take somebody you would consider an utter carebear. Then take something risky, yet still in the realm of possibility, but with huge rewards. Say, something like this...
Have a CCP-guaranteed announcement that he will receive 100 bil ISK if he reaches 10 random 0.0 locations (to be comunicated to him and only to him) in the next 7 days in a single ship.
What would you say, will he take that trip or will he stay home ?
I'm willing to bet you all your ISK that most people you call "carebears" would step up to the challenge.

Quote:
But hey, you can ignore that fact if you want. The eve community has the final vote on this matter. After six years it looks like they're still voting to stay away from danger.

But hey, you can repeatedly ignore the fact that 2++ years ago, back when lowsec mining didn't completely suck yet the percentage of people that actually lived in highsec was pretty damned high compared to today.
It wasn't even an insane level of rewards, it was mining ferchrissakes, and in the belts, where you don't even need to be PROBED FOR, the directional scanner does just fine to catch you too.

The community isn't VOTING to stay out of danger, the community is screaming "do I look stupid enough to go out in the dangerous areas if I can earn more than enough in the complete safety of highsec?"







You think other people think the way you do. You don't understand the risk adverse mind set. Therefore your view of things is warped to fit your bias.

That also explains why you keep ignoring the risk adverse part and pretend people will take risks if you just give them a bigger lolly pop.

Because YOU would take the risk, you think others will.

And that is where you fail.

Confused

I learned a long time ago some people will not put their **** on the line no matter what the reward.

And that's sorta sad because as you and I both seem to know taking the risk is where the fun is.





Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.04 16:21:00 - [384]
 

Originally by: Drunk Driver
You don't understand the risk adverse mind set.

If I'm not what you would probably call risk-averse, I don't know who else is.
In spite of being reasonably wealthy and with SP galore, I only fly cheap-as-hell ships on a lightly trained, cheap clone alt for PvP purposes. I seldom put myself in a position where I am not fairly confident I will emerge with a net benefit out of it, be it combat, economy or otherwise. I almost never venture into lowsec anymore on my main, let alone 0.0, even if I could easily afford a nigh-uncatcheable ship and not really feel its loss if I do manage to make some critical mistake. I've had most of my friends live in lowsec/0.0 for a good while, and some still do, but in spite of that all, I prefer to remain in highsec at this time.
Why ? Because I can make a truckload of ISK for next to no effort in so many different ways, and the main reason I can do that at all is BECAUSE there's so many people here. Would highsec population rates drop heavily, I'd have a far harder time making ISK so easily.
But I would still leave highsec in a beat if the potential for profit "out there" would be proportionate to the self-perceived risks, compared to the amount of ISK I can make in highsec.

Nobody is actually "risk averse". People are only averse to DISPROPORTIONATE risks.
Taking risks is fun, but only as long as you can expect (on average) to earn just as much as taking no risks... otherwise it's not "taking risks", it's GAMBLING (and in the end, the house always wins, not you).

chrisss0r
The Lowbirds
Posted - 2009.06.04 16:35:00 - [385]
 

if your arguing on rational choice your argument becomes even more flawed since people will already do what yields them the most fun.

Drunk Driver
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.06.04 17:36:00 - [386]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Drunk Driver
You don't understand the risk adverse mind set.

If I'm not what you would probably call risk-averse, I don't know who else is.
In spite of being reasonably wealthy and with SP galore, I only fly cheap-as-hell ships on a lightly trained, cheap clone alt for PvP purposes. I seldom put myself in a position where I am not fairly confident I will emerge with a net benefit out of it, be it combat, economy or otherwise. I almost never venture into lowsec anymore on my main, let alone 0.0, even if I could easily afford a nigh-uncatcheable ship and not really feel its loss if I do manage to make some critical mistake. I've had most of my friends live in lowsec/0.0 for a good while, and some still do, but in spite of that all, I prefer to remain in highsec at this time.
Why ? Because I can make a truckload of ISK for next to no effort in so many different ways, and the main reason I can do that at all is BECAUSE there's so many people here. Would highsec population rates drop heavily, I'd have a far harder time making ISK so easily.
But I would still leave highsec in a beat if the potential for profit "out there" would be proportionate to the self-perceived risks, compared to the amount of ISK I can make in highsec.

Nobody is actually "risk averse". People are only averse to DISPROPORTIONATE risks.
Taking risks is fun, but only as long as you can expect (on average) to earn just as much as taking no risks... otherwise it's not "taking risks", it's GAMBLING (and in the end, the house always wins, not you).




Clearly you're not risk adverse and don't understand people who are.

I mean, seriously, do you think you can come up with a way to trick people who don't like risk to willingly walk into ganking pens and do it over and over?

Seriously?





Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.04 22:13:00 - [387]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 04/06/2009 22:19:55
Originally by: Drunk Driver
Clearly you're not risk adverse and don't understand people who are.

I have yet to meet anybody in EVE that is noticeably more risk-adverse than I am.
Give a carebear enough money to cover the cost of a fresh ship plus fitings (minus insurance payout) and the clone cost, give him a bit of time to jump in an implantless clone (or promise to pay for implants too), and he WILL come with you into 0.0 to have some PVP, no matter how carebearish.

Originally by: Drunk Driver
I mean, seriously, do you think you can come up with a way to trick people who don't like risk to willingly walk into ganking pens and do it over and over?
Seriously?

Yes, yes I do. Dangle more carrots, bigger carrots. It WILL be enough.
Seriously.

Nel Tu
Minmatar
The Interstellar Cupcake Company
Posted - 2009.06.04 22:39:00 - [388]
 

Edited by: Nel Tu on 04/06/2009 22:43:27
Originally by: Drunk Driver
Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Drunk Driver
Risk adverse players will not venture into areas where they can be killed.
You can spew any argument you want and that fact will not change.
Too simple for some to understand it would seem.

Not too simple, just simply wrong.




Nope, not wrong. It's simple truth.

The key here is risk adverse. Some people will not take risks. That's why the mega-boring mmo WoW does so well. Those type of people are also in Eve. They live in Empire. They don't venture into low sec or 0.0 for a reason. They know you're trying to gank them. They will avoid that at any cost.

But hey, you can ignore that fact if you want. The eve community has the final vote on this matter. After six years it looks like they're still voting to stay away from danger.


(Kinda sad really as the best part of the game is getting shot at and shooting back.) Sad



People may not be as adverse to PVP in eve as some people may think. However, I do know one specific aspect that probably chases alot of new people away from lowsec as well as 0.0... which would be gate camps.

I'm not going to go into the aspects and balances of PvP, but I DO know that when a new person comes into low-sec for the first time and gets instantly jammed/scrammed/webbed and then podded in a matter of seconds... they don't come back. It may take them a few times (probably from trying to get around that camp itself) but eventually it will come to "**** this, it's a waste of time" and they'll go back to high-sec (this isn't taking into effect the jeers and bragging of the campers either, even though they popped some random noob).

I personally love PvP. I do it in every MMO I ever played, if it had that specific aspect. But even I usually stay away from half the low-sec areas, unless I'm in a CovOps, because gate camps are so incredibly stupid it prohibits alot of possible new blood to going into low sec. It happened to me the first time, when I was a 1 month old newbie in a rifter wanting to explore and maybe shoot things (whether they be players or otherwise) when I got insta-gimped by a smart-bombing BS.

In short, alot of things need to be changed... just a matter of it happening.

Edit: I realize that my post was geared more towards people saying there's not much going on in low-sec, and not high-sec mission running profit. But I believe the two affect each other.

Forge Lag
Jita Lag Preservation Fund
Posted - 2009.06.04 23:16:00 - [389]
 

Akita, ask yourself, what legitimate reasons CCP could have to do things the way they do them.

Also, maybe outside highsec everything is a group effort and you are so brilliant the group would only drag you down.

I can think about ways to make FW more attractive to your kind or T3 have broader appeal. But just tweaking risk vs reward is something everyone can come up with and one would say got turned down for a reason.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.05 00:13:00 - [390]
 

Originally by: Forge Lag
Akita, ask yourself, what legitimate reasons CCP could have to do things the way they do them.

On one hand, they have a policy of "minimal interference with the market", but on the other hand they have a tendency for insanely strong knee-jerk reactions which they are blissfully unaware of the exact effects they will have.

Take for instance the most straightforward thing in EVE at this time, the T1 sector, and the insurance system.

On one side, you have mineral creation (mining, drone alloys and loot reprocessing), in the middle you have the manufacturers and then the consumer, and on the other side you have the destruction of ships and the insurance payout.
Now, as we can easily see from the fact most ships sell closer to the 70% of base price rather than at or above the base price, the only conclusion that can be drawn is that global supply of minerals is ahead of the global demand for T1 products (and therefore, demand for minerals).
Because the insurance payouts have a fixed value, the "basket of minerals" (in ratios typical for ship construction) will might have some minor fluctuations every now and then, but overall, the price level is fairly steady in a narrow range most of the time. On the other hand, the supply of individual minerals ISN'T in the "proper" ratio for ship construction.
Right now, there's very little correction being done on individual minerals, therefore each one of them will individually fluctuate wildly according to fluctuations in the supply ratios, while the overall price level of the "basket" remains unchanged.

Once upon a time, NPCs actually had buy orders for each individual minerals at half the base price of each mineral (well, more like 55% of it, but that's not the point), which propped up each and every mineral up artificially. Not just that, but there was a glut of refineable NPC-sold goods which also provided a fairly low upper price cap for each of the minerals too (especially lowends). At the same time, missions were slightly harder to run (since we had no rigs in the game), there were no drone regions to supply large amounts of only certain types of minerals, and there certainly were no wormholes with insane amounts of highend ore fields in them right next to highsec, to name but the latest change.

Now, somehow, CCP had the misguided idea that they were "interfering" too much with the prices of minerals by having all those buy orders in place, so they first cut highend buy orders (that was a long time ago), then later on they also cut most lowend buy orders while in the same timeframe removing the source of REALLY cheap tritanium (coupling arrays used to yield tritanium at barely 2.3 ISK per unit or thereabouts) on top of soon after introducing rigs and the drone regions, and not long after removing item after item that could yield relatively cheap tritanium, culminating in the removal of NPC shuttle sell orders (which had tritanium at 3.6 ISK per unit at the lower bound).
All of that mean that suddendly tritanium could go up as much as the market could handle, while all the midends and highends that were suddendly available more easily in larger numbers had no other choice but to start a downward plunge.

So, while CCP was attempting to "stay out of the markets", all they accomplished was to imbalance pretty much everything else, and it started getting bad about two years ago.
They had removed the caps (all hard and most soft ones, both upper and lower) for each individual mineral, but at the same time they created a heavy supply imbalance that went AGAINST the base prices and typical usage ratios, the two things combining to create a disastrous shift in the prices of individual minerals.
The joke however is ore mining value, distributed across system security based on BASE mineral prices... which are no longer relevant AT ALL for that purpose... so now we have Veldspar just 3 times cheaper than Arkonor instead of the intended 16 times !


Pages: first : previous : ... 9 10 11 12 [13] 14 15 16 17 ... : last (18)

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only