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

Author Topic

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.05 00:26:00 - [391]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 05/06/2009 00:26:48

[...continued from last post/page...]

Yes, you heard right, Veldspar was originally intended to be worth barely above 1/16 of Arkonor, but due to all these changes which are basically CCP's doing (ironically, in the name of free market and all that nonsense) it ended up as being one of the more valuable ores in spite of its abundance due to the imbalance between obtainable amounts and needed amounts in the system.
So, after CCP radically changed just about everything about the mineral prices, and screwed up the supply side of it all by so many additional vanues to obtain minerals... what exactly do they do for mining itself, which is not completely off the initial balance ? NOTHING !
So, they can break anything (as long as it's not intentional and are not aware of the repercussions it would have, in spite of many players warning them of the exact type of effect their changes will have), but when it comes to fixing things, it's suddendly "we can't interfere"... well, guess what, you already interfered in the first place, so you might as well interfere a bit more to fix what you broke in the first place.

Of course, why would anybody bother with lowsec belts (granted, lowsec ore sites are marginally decent), when you can get just as much, if not MORE cash from mining just about anything you can find in highsec ? And why risk 0.0 mining (good luck even GETTING in a place with enough Ark, you'd be lucky if you have access to Crok) when it pays barely two or three times more than safely shuffling for Veldspar in highsec ?
Is it any wonder nobody bothers mining in lowsec anymore ? And that outside of deep alliance-controlled 0.0 space, very few people bother mining ?


The solutions are multiple, yet for years, CCP has done nothing.
It can be something as simple as, for instance, completely revamping the CONTENTS of ores, so that in similar security ratings you usually obtain just about everything you need for ship construction in the proper ratios if you mine some of each type of ore... the only difference being that you'd get more of everything as you go on to ore that can only be found in lower sec ratings. It's a brutal change, but it would be an extremely EFFECTIVE change.
Another alternative would be a complete revamp of the mining system, with all ores available everywhere, but instead of having a fixed yield regardless of asteroid mined, you could have things like 1/10 yield, or x10 yield, depening on type of ore and security rating you find yourself in (Arkonor rocks in highsec would have the lowest possible yields but x1 yields in deep 0.0, while Veldspar rocks would have x1.0 yields in highest highsec, but insane x10 or even x16 yields in deep 0.0).
And those are just two of many possible fixes.
What do we see ?
Nothing.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2009.06.05 01:32:00 - [392]
 

ITT: Akita T being an attention-whoring ISK slave, wants CCP to change the game so there's more ISK to be made when engaging in PvP, because PvP by itself is not rewarding enough for him to participate.

Originally by: Akita T
EVE PLAYERS LUST FOR POWER - be it in form of territory, fame or cold, hard ISK - AND THE ONLY WAY TO ENSURE SOMETHING IS BEING USED IS TO MAKE IT EVER SO SLIGHTLY MORE ATTRACTIVE IN TERMS OF POWER GAIN POTENTIAL THAN OTHER ALREADY EXISTING ALTERNATIVES.


Not all players are as blindly motivated by ISK as you are, Akita T. You said it yourself - some players lust for territory or even just fame. These players will be motivated to do whatever activity is most likely to reward their desire. I expect that player motivated to control territory isn't going to be interested in lowsec level 4 missions that pay out a billion ISK.


Drunk Driver
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.06.05 01:33:00 - [393]
 

Originally by: Akita T
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.





Sounds like you've got a plan.

Good luck!

Laughing

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.05 04:05:00 - [394]
 

Quote:
Not all players are as blindly motivated by ISK as you are, Akita T.

Define "blindly" in the context of your post.
Do you mean that I should be happy with whatever ISK I can get with whatever it is I do no matter the amount obtained, or that I should intentionally engage in some activities that are guaranteed to yield less ISK overall just because you feel they might be more enjoyable to me, or what exactly do you mean by that "blindly" there ?
Next thing you know, you're going to tell me that ISK doesn't matter at all to you, and that all ISK you get yourself is free anyway, so it has no value whatsoever... yet when I'd ask for some of that ISK you'd refuse on grounds of it having sentimental value or other somesuch nonsense.

Originally by: Mara Rinn
You said it yourself - some players lust for territory or even just fame. These players will be motivated to do whatever activity is most likely to reward their desire. I expect that player motivated to control territory isn't going to be interested in lowsec level 4 missions that pay out a billion ISK.

Yeah, because territory control comes for free, and because you'd really want to control worthless territory ?
Occupying territory costs ISK (alongside manpower, of course, which can be hired to some degree with ISK), and is motivated by the ISK-making potential of that territory.
How many people do you hear fighting for any particular shallow 0.0 system that has no outposts, just a few belts, and next to nothing interesting moon-mining-wise ? Yeah, thought so.

It doesn't matter what each individual is interested in doing, or the precise method any one particular individual chooses to finance his activities. What DOES matter however is the percentage of people that are interested in various things, and the percentages of people engaged in various ISK-making activities.

And right now, way too many people (INCLUDING alts of plenty of people that live in lowsec or 0.0) find themselves nearly obligated into engaging in L4 highsec mission-running, as the one guaranteed, steady, risk-free and reasonably lucrative source of ISK for _whatever_ their ISK needs might be.

Petra Katell
Pator Tech School
Posted - 2009.06.05 04:18:00 - [395]
 

Good.

Running level 4's helps people fuel PVP. This is a PVP game.

Make the ISK grind more difficult and watch people drop like flies. I know if I needed to put too many hours into replacing my losses I'd just stop playing. I don't have the time or the patience for it. It's already a pain as it stands.

Right now the balance is fine, it takes more than enough hours earn enough to fit a T2 fitted T2 ship and no I don't want to fly around in Thoraxes for the rest of my EVE career.

There's no L4 problem. Move along.

Nooma K'Larr
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.06.05 04:20:00 - [396]
 

Someone pleeeeeze put this thread out of its misery.Crying or Very sad

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.05 04:25:00 - [397]
 

Originally by: Petra Katell
Running level 4's helps people fuel PVP. This is a PVP game.

There aren't enough Picard facepalm images in the world to properly express what I;m feeling right now.

This is a PVP game, yes. But the PVP in this game is not its own purpose.
You're talking as if EVE PVP would be Counterstrike, when EVE PVP is more like Command&Conquer.
You don't fight for the sake of fighting, you fight to take and keep control of ways to make more ISK.
If you want Counterstrike-style PVP, go play almost exclusively on SiSi.
[sarcasm]Oh... meaningless, you say ? But... why ? It's fighting for the sake of fighting ![/sarcasm]


Petra Katell
Pator Tech School
Posted - 2009.06.05 04:31:00 - [398]
 

Facepalm all you like.

I don't PVP to make ISK or to control territory.

I fight because it's fun and the adrenaline rush I get from it. Nothing more nothing less. People's loot and smack talking is just a bonus.

I could care less about territory.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.05 04:36:00 - [399]
 

Originally by: Petra Katell
I fight because it's fun and the adrenaline rush I get from it.

It seems too much to ask at this point, but can you even start to figure out WHY EXACTLY do you get an adrenaline rush from EVE PVP ?
Let me give you a hint : it's because a ship loss (yours or theirs) means a loss of ISK, which means a loss of ingame real-time (either personal, or somebody else's purchased via PLEX with real cash, which also mean real time spent working).
The more equivalent TIME you risk (no matter how much ISK that means), the higher the rush.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2009.06.05 04:44:00 - [400]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Define "blindly" in the context of your post.


You do it quite nicely yourself:

Quote:
Do you mean that ... I should intentionally engage in some activities that are guaranteed to yield less ISK overall just because you feel they might be more enjoyable to me, or what exactly do you mean by that "blindly" there ?


OMG, perish the thought that just blowing up random ships in lowsec might actually be fun to some people simply because it appeals to their nihilistic tendencies.

Quote:
Next thing you know, you're going to tell me that ISK doesn't matter at all to you


No, but you're the one who has made that claim on these forums in the last week or so. No, I can't be bothered to find one particular post by Akita T, 100th most prolific poster on these forums. Something along the lines of, "I make enough ISK that I don't care about it anymore." But then you go on to justify everything you do in terms of ISK/hr.

Quote:
Occupying territory costs ISK (alongside manpower, of course, which can be hired to some degree with ISK), and is motivated by the ISK-making potential of that territory.


I do not dispute that controlling territory is affected by how much ISK you have to throw at the effort. I do dispute the fact that controlling territory is motivated by ISK-making potential of the territory.

Sometimes controlling territory is about denying someone else access to resources that are not part of that territory. Shutting down a logistics chain for example, could be as much about denying someone the ability to haul capital ship components down a "pipe" as it is about preventing moon mining operations or other direct ISK generation activities.

Indeed, breaking logsitics chains could be as much about "preventing that freighter getting to system X within the next 30 minutes" as it is about "preventing any of alliance X's ships transiting these three systems."

You see, some people have their ships supplied to them, and they happily pay their game time using real money. In fact, some people will fund their supply of PvP ships and POS fuel with ISK that they traded for PLEX. For them, ISK generation is not an issue at all!

Quote:
How many people do you hear fighting for any particular shallow 0.0 system that has no outposts, just a few belts, and next to nothing interesting moon-mining-wise ? Yeah, thought so.


Hrm... what if the moonless, stationless, ISK-generation-negative system happened to be a junction between three systems you want to control, and the rest of the EVE cluster? Such as systems like AH-B84? There's an outpost in that system, an ice field, other items of interest - but to someone aiming to control territory, locking down the AH-B84 to J7YR-1 gate is worth all the resources in the five systems behind that gate.

Why would you want to control territory? Sometimes it's not about ISK generation, it could be about maintaining sovereignty so you can do stuff like build capital ships. Other times it could be about collecting kill mails.

Quote:
And right now, way too many people (INCLUDING alts of plenty of people that live in lowsec or 0.0) find themselves nearly obligated into engaging in L4 highsec mission-running, as the one guaranteed, steady, risk-free and reasonably lucrative source of ISK for _whatever_ their ISK needs might be.


While for everyone else there's trading on the market, T2 manufacture, running logistics supplies for lowsec corporations, which can all return more ISK than mission-running. Unfortunately the big money requires a lot of planning and thinking, which is lacking in those people dependent on mission-running for their income.

If you're spending time running missions for ISK, and you don't enjoy it, perhaps consider buying play time for people who enjoy the brainless ISK farming activity?


Petra Katell
Pator Tech School
Posted - 2009.06.05 04:50:00 - [401]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Petra Katell
I fight because it's fun and the adrenaline rush I get from it.

It seems too much to ask at this point, but can you even start to figure out WHY EXACTLY do you get an adrenaline rush from EVE PVP ?
Let me give you a hint : it's because a ship loss (yours or theirs) means a loss of ISK, which means a loss of ingame real-time (either personal, or somebody else's purchased via PLEX with real cash, which also mean real time spent working).
The more equivalent TIME you risk (no matter how much ISK that means), the higher the rush.



Oh absolutely, no question. The point I'm making is if you make the TIME sink too HIGH to replace ships losses in PVP, it no longer becomes WORTH the EFFORT to replace them anymore. I only have SO MUCH TIME to play games. It's not confusing. If I have to put in too many boring hours to get in a few fun hours then I'll find something else to play. Right now level 4's and ratting in 0.0 are ENOUGH of a boring TIME SINK to replace losses and actually have some variety in the ships I own to keep the game interesting.

Some of us want:

PVP and just enough of a time sink to keep the losses painful enough. Just want to kill people for fun and have absolutely zero interest in any industry, trading or any other PVE activity in the game. Missions are painful enough as it is.




Mara Rinn
Posted - 2009.06.05 04:56:00 - [402]
 

Edited by: Mara Rinn on 05/06/2009 05:00:32
Originally by: Akita T
It seems too much to ask at this point, but can you even start to figure out WHY EXACTLY do you get an adrenaline rush from EVE PVP ?


Ah, here we go, why don't you go telling everyone why they're really playing the game - after all, you're omniscient!

What if, for example, Petra's adrenaline rush was simply due to the pleasure of destroying someone else's property, regardless of the insignificance of the value of that property?

Does a two-year-old child tell you that you're using their toy because they see a dollar value in that toy? No, they want that toy for no other reason than you have it and they don't.

I expect that most people who PvP for the fun of it view ISK as a necessary evil. They aren't interested in blowing things up because they cost ISK to replace, they're interested in blowing things up because it hurts someone else.

Nihilism, sadism: there are plenty of other "ism" motivators that drive people besides capitalism.

edit: I'd add that for some people, replacing a ship could be as meaningless as, "keep pressing this button for 15 minutes and another fitted rifter will magically appear in your hangar". That's all that ISK means to them - generating it is a time sink, having it means being able to obtain more ships with which to go out and blow stuff up.

Gnulpie
Minmatar
Miner Tech
Posted - 2009.06.05 06:05:00 - [403]
 

Originally by: Akita T
what exactly do they do for mining itself, which is not completely off the initial balance ? NOTHING !



Rorqual, Orca, gravimetric sites.

Originally by: Akita T
(good luck even GETTING in a place with enough Ark, you'd be lucky if you have access to Crok)
...And that outside of deep alliance-controlled 0.0 space, very few people bother mining ?



Did you have a look at wormhole gravimetric sites? Even the class1 wormholes contain HUGE amounts ore, and also high end ores. A single site worth 250+ mil with just a few very big roids (easy to mine therefore) is not the exception but normal there. And you have many grav sites there.

*leans back and watches the high end minerals dropping even more in price*

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2009.06.05 06:29:00 - [404]
 

Yup, W-space is going to be the end of nullsec mining.


Acedias
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.06.05 06:36:00 - [405]
 

So err.. for those of us just finishing a night shift, would someone be kind enough to throw these walloftext posts into the form of a 3 window comic strip? A doodle of a spaceship on a beer mat will probably do, with a note about not buffing mining.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2009.06.05 10:31:00 - [406]
 

Let's see if I can do it:

Akita T: level 4s are overpowered! ISK slaves like myself need to be lured out of level 4s by something more profitable! I can't enjoy playing the game if I'm not making ISK!
Crowd: Adapt or Die!
Akita T: I HAVE TO JUSTIFY EVERY BREATH IN TERMS OF ISK/HR!
Crowd: PvP is for fun, not profit
Akita T: EVE IS GOING TO DIIIIEEEEEE....
Crowd: *yawns*


Sun Ra
Euphoria Released
HYDRA RELOADED
Posted - 2009.06.05 10:42:00 - [407]
 

Well ive been away for along time but when i sued to low sec pirate there were unoffical alliances that agent runners in molden heath had where they'd give intel on pirates movements and group up to fight us, guess people/macros are to lazy/cant do that now.

TBH i dont care for moving lvl 4 to low sec but they need to make those things harder so bloody macros cant do them ffs

As for low sec it should be somewhere for small alliance or larger corps who dont have access to 0.0 to be able to make money without having to deal with holding space

Skjorta
Posted - 2009.06.05 11:03:00 - [408]
 

More ships under 100m that aren't a frig or a piece of ****.

t1 or t2.

Another BC would be awesome...because...only 2? 1 was bad enough...but even at its current state there's still more of every other t1 ship type.

I can't believe they spent all that time on worthless t3 before doing this.

I know CCP is trying to retain "end game" players, but a lot of end game high sp players like to fly suicidal and cheap...not 1b isk ships everyday.

Only good thing to come out of the "HUGE MASSIVE OMG" Expansions this past year that I even cared about...was the skill queue and remap...and that's ****ing sad...out of all the new things introduced.

My 2c.

5pinDizzy
Amarr
Pillow Fighters Inc
Posted - 2009.06.05 11:24:00 - [409]
 

Hmm, *thinks what ships that cost under 100 mill and worth flying*

Interceptors
Stealth Bombers
Electronic Attack Ships
Augoror Navy Issue (Other lower level Navy Cruisers are junk)
Logistic cruisers
Tier 2 Battlecruisers
All Battleships except Tempest and the Raven



PureWoman
Posted - 2009.06.05 11:30:00 - [410]
 

Edited by: PureWoman on 05/06/2009 11:40:13
people who make missions and money work for it. try to make good standing and do missions. this is dramatically boring - there is thousands of missions to do to make it high.
there is nothing other to do in eve, so many people do missions. all 0 has beed grabbed by russian and pets like goons, razor ect., all free initiative in low/0 is imediality destroyed. People in empire are the last independent people.
we need more changes than you think. What is the point of fight when somebody drop on your head 20+ titans with DD.
sometimes ago my friend show me RW (from ogame) - he play for 5 yers now - and there was.
your 1600 deathstars destroing bla bla bla... this is not a game any more.
they should cut moon mining long time ago, not a missions, and never make titans.
they should cut icebot mining long time ago, but no... so there are the consequences
they should boost mining - but no - they make drone region where you mine when fight.
Wormholes are good. Some people go there and mine, so we have cheap zydrine, thay do somethink else then missionruning Wink

Matrix Skye
Caldari
State War Academy
Posted - 2009.06.05 11:37:00 - [411]
 

Akita T,

You're passionate about taking this game in a direction that few would approve of, including devs. You consider yourself an intelligent person, don't you? I mean, you think you know what it takes to make this game successful, don't you? Well, here's a suggestion, and I mean it from the bottom of my heart, so don't take this the wrong way.

Why don't you, Malcanis, Vaerah, and Ruze, which seem to be the most vocal, develop a competition game to Eve just how you envision it. You guys are smart, aren't you? Start the project then. And do it the way you think is "right", with no carebears. Pure elite and hardcore to the bone. Why not? That way you let this game be, you won't get a heart attack from trying to push and shove your ideas unto CCP, and you get to create a game just how you think it should be.

Drunk Driver
Gallente
Aliastra
Posted - 2009.06.05 13:03:00 - [412]
 

Originally by: Akita T

The more equivalent TIME you risk (no matter how much ISK that means), the higher the rush.




This I will agree with.

If isk were harder get, I think the game would be better.

So I could go along with changes in mining, the market, etc. if it made isk harder to get.

I could even go along with changes in location for high profitability resources.

I just will not agree any of this will force care bears to present themselves in greater numbers for PvP. If you make the game too dangerous for them, they will find something else to play.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2009.06.05 13:12:00 - [413]
 

Originally by: Drunk Driver
So I could go along with changes in mining, the market, etc. if it made isk harder to get.


Please do not conflate mining with ISK generation. Mining is a trade - you mine stuff, and exchange that stuff for ISK that other people already have in their hot little hands.

Quote:
I could even go along with changes in location for high profitability resources.


Me personally? I'd love to see Dysprosium moons moved to lowsec. Have fun defending that :)

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.05 14:14:00 - [414]
 

Originally by: Matrix Skye
You're passionate about taking this game in a direction that few would approve of, including devs.

I have a feeling most of the people in the "opposing Akita T posts" (yourself included) completely misunderstand the "direction" I am advocating primarily. How exactly is "leaving highsec exactly as it is and increasing rewards for non-highsec activities above that of similar highsec activities" a direction a few would approve of ? And the devs, when they initially DESIGNED the game, they designed it with that in mind.

Originally by: Gnulpie
Originally by: Akita T
what exactly do they do for mining itself, which is not completely off the initial balance ? NOTHING !

Rorqual, Orca, gravimetric sites.[...]wormhole gravimetric sites[...]leans back and watches the high end minerals dropping even more in price*

Heh... precisely : they did something, but in the COMPLETELY WRONG direction.
Instead of introducing some ways to obtain the needed lowends in larger amounts (in other words, even remotely profitably compared to "mining for highends") so that a balance of extraction with usage can be reached, all they did was introduce even MORE sources of highends and ways to mine faster overall, not differentiated at all.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2009.06.05 14:27:00 - [415]
 

Originally by: Akita T
How exactly is "leaving highsec exactly as it is and increasing rewards for non-highsec activities above that of similar highsec activities" a direction a few would approve of ? And the devs, when they initially DESIGNED the game, they designed it with that in mind.


The rewards of lowsec and nullsec are balanced enough, aren't they?

It's just that the rewards are not ISK for the sake of ISK. Some of the rewards are the ability to resolve conflict by blowing people up, other rewards are being part of something bigger than the individual.

It is your preoccupation with measuring the value of things in terms of ISK that is obscuring your view of the rewards of lowsec/nullsec living.

Originally by: Akita T
Instead of introducing some ways to obtain the needed lowends in larger amounts (in other words, even remotely profitably compared to "mining for highends") so that a balance of extraction with usage can be reached, all they did was introduce even MORE sources of highends and ways to mine faster overall, not differentiated at all.


I agree with you to some extent there - veldspar & tritanium need to be balanced somehow. Whether this is by simply reducing the volume of veldspar and tritanium (by half, or a third, would be enough), or reducing the quantities of tritanium required to build things, doesn't really matter. The sheer logistics of hauling tritanium around the place mean that there has to be some minimum price, otherwise people won't haul it.

If we could haul twice as much tritanium in the same ships, the price of tritanium could come down. Well, that, or tritanium hauling would become entirely the domain of people specialising in mineral compression, who have high standings with all the corporations of interest.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.06.05 14:57:00 - [416]
 

Originally by: Mara Rinn
The rewards of lowsec and nullsec are balanced enough, aren't they?

Let's see... and let's compare apples with apples...

1.MINING

CURRENT SITUATION revenues
Highsec : belts 120 ISK/m^3 via Veldspar (it slightly dropped these past days, used to be more), sites still Veldspar rules
Lowsec : belts STILL Veldspar, with Omber at under 60, Kernite around 85, Jaspet not even 45 ; sites you can hope for some 135 ISK/m^3 Gneiss now and then
0.0 : Dark Ochre barely beats Veldspar at 126 ISK/m^3, we have roughly 250 ISK/m^3 Crokite, 350 ISK/m^3 Bistot, 450 ISK/m^3 Arkonor (whee, at least this last one has seen a mild rise the last few days, even since Tritanium started dropping)

ORIGINALLY INTENDED revenues (taken at 85% of BASE price, which is a reasonable expectation)
Highsec : from 51 ISK/m^3 (Veldspar) to 99 ISK/m^3 (Pyroxeres), with select locations at 115 ISK/m^3 (Omber) and 133 ISK/m^3 (Kernite)
Lowsec : starting at 143 ISK/m^3 Jaspet up to 191 ISK/m^3 Hedbergite
0.0 : starting from 204 ISK/m^3 with Dark Ochre, continuing with 323 ISK/m^3 Crokite, 555 ISK/m^3 Bistot and up to 813 ISK/m^3 Arkonor

I would certainly say that the rewards are far out of the initially intended ratios... and everything else isn't much better either.

Quote:
It's just that the rewards are not ISK for the sake of ISK. Some of the rewards are the ability to resolve conflict by blowing people up, other rewards are being part of something bigger than the individual.

But overall, on a GLOBAL scale, statistically speaking, IT IS about the ISK.

Quote:
It is your preoccupation with measuring the value of things in terms of ISK that is obscuring your view of the rewards of lowsec/nullsec living.

It is your lack of preocupation with ISK revenue that is obscuring the real reason so many people end up being branded "carebears" because they refuse to go (or go anymore) where they won't have significant chances of making more ISK long-term.

Quote:
Originally by: Akita T
Instead of introducing some ways to obtain the needed lowends in larger amounts (in other words, even remotely profitably compared to "mining for highends") so that a balance of extraction with usage can be reached, all they did was introduce even MORE sources of highends and ways to mine faster overall, not differentiated at all.

I agree with you to some extent there - veldspar & tritanium need to be balanced somehow. Whether this is by simply reducing the volume of veldspar and tritanium (by half, or a third, would be enough), or reducing the quantities of tritanium required to build things, doesn't really matter. The sheer logistics of hauling tritanium around the place mean that there has to be some minimum price, otherwise people won't haul it.

If we could haul twice as much tritanium in the same ships, the price of tritanium could come down. Well, that, or tritanium hauling would become entirely the domain of people specialising in mineral compression, who have high standings with all the corporations of interest.



The solution is not to look at just ONE mineral at particular, but at ALL minerals as a whole.
What's the point of easily available Tritanium, if next we'd get a Pyerite or maybe a Mexallon shortage ?
No, any system that wants to solve anything needs to take a hard look at the mineral/ore yields on one hand (while not neglecting the issue of a significant percentage of minerals NOT coming from mining at all in the first place), then at the manufacture and insurance system on the other hand.
If the current mineral build ratios remain, the minerals from ore extraction need to be rebalanced.
If ore and the entire mining system remains the same, ship and item build mineral needs need to be heavily readjusted.
Either way, focusing on one single thing can only result in even more failures - you have to look at all of it in a single glance and make it work with eachother.

Indigo Johnson
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.06.05 14:59:00 - [417]
 

Great thread, Akita T, please stand for CSM next year.

Ana Vyr
Caldari
Posted - 2009.06.05 15:06:00 - [418]
 

Originally by: Nel Tu

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.


I came back after such a gank...but I made damned sure I was in a Blockade Runner first. I agree with you though that a large part of the risk adversity that seems to plague new players is learned on gate camps. Bubble camps in 0.0 are even worse by a large margin...even a Blockade Runner won't save your butt there in a lot of cases.

Mara Rinn
Posted - 2009.06.05 15:23:00 - [419]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Let's see... and let's compare apples with apples...


No, you miss the point again.

Lowsec rewards are not about ISK/hr. Lowsec rewards are about killmails, and the pleasure of blowing stuff up.

Quote:
But overall, on a GLOBAL scale, statistically speaking, IT IS about the ISK.


I disagree. That's like saying that overall, on a global scale, a human body is about blood.

Quote:
It is your lack of preocupation with ISK revenue that is obscuring the real reason so many people end up being branded "carebears" because they refuse to go (or go anymore) where they won't have significant chances of making more ISK long-term.


LOL

Carebears are people who don't want to take risks. There are carebears in pirate corps too - they're the ones who sit on the gate camping happily until more people enter local than they're willing to fight. Then it's station hugging for the rest of the evening.

Some of the people you are mis-labelling "carebears" are the ISK-farming alts of people in nullsec alliances who just want to kick back and relax rather than face burnout in the endless patrolling of the regions of nullsec that their alliance has laid claim to.

I guess they are carebears in a way - they're avoiding the risk of burning out by doing something else with their time apart from bash POSes from dawn till dusk.

The point is, these people are in hisec exactly because it is not lowsec or nullsec. They're not in "stuck in hisec" for lack of reason to leave.

Quote:
No, any system that wants to solve anything needs to take a hard look at the mineral/ore yields on one hand (while not neglecting the issue of a significant percentage of minerals NOT coming from mining at all in the first place), then at the manufacture and insurance system on the other hand.



Any changes need to be small, baby steps. I'm pretty sure that reducing the volume of veldspar and tritanium will cause more of it to appear on the market. The price will be able to fall since the haulers won't need to make as much profit per unit in order to make it worth their while to haul. This will help restore tritanium to the "low end" of the minerals market.

I haven't seen anything from CCP detailing where those "40% of minerals from refined loot" actually came from. I would expect a large portion of that is due to mineral compression. To be honest, as a mission-runner I wouuld prefer that T1 loot didn't drop at all.

Reducing the quantities of tritanium required in manufacture would require wholesale changes to the database - things will go wrong in unexpected ways. Reducing the physical volume of tritanium will (I hope) have far fewer unintended consequences.

In the meantime, I'm heavily researching my citadel torpedo blueprints.

And I'll leave you with these questions: how many dollars per hour are you paid to play EVE Online? Is there something else you could be doing in that time that would earn you more money? If so, why aren't you doing it?

Hurtado Soneka
Caldari
Vindicare Temple
Posted - 2009.06.05 15:24:00 - [420]
 

FW failed? wake up


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