open All Channels
seplocked Science and Industry
blankseplocked Yet Another T1 Loot Drop Thread
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
Posted - 2009.10.10 06:08:00 - [1]
 

In the recent thread about Science and Industry, and some F&I threads, the T1 loot drop issue comes up, been coming p for quite some time too.

The problem with most of the solutions are they're too complex, they negate some skills such as scrap metal, etc. Pretty much all of the solutions deal with one side of the equation - reduce the minerals dropped in missions. But what about the other side.

What if, instead of nerfing loot drops, all T1 production took twice as many minerals, and scrap reprocessing was reduced by 50% of the new values, meaning it stays the same as it is now. The other thing impacted by this would be insurance, it could use the new base value or remain at the current base value.

Not sure if I like this idea or not, but it is another possible approach.

MightyRhinox
Minmatar
Rhinox Heavy Industries
Twilight Military Industrial Complex Alliance
Posted - 2009.10.10 07:18:00 - [2]
 

I think the simplest solution would be to remove meta 0 module drops altogether (keep the named mods) and maybe replace them with increased ammo drops.
This would at least restore the t1 mod market to some extent for manufacturers and the ammo market wouldn't be too badly damaged as missioners would still likely be consuming more of their favorite ammo per mission than would drop....

Aveneer Walker
Posted - 2009.10.10 10:09:00 - [3]
 

Well here is my solution, leave as is, its find, newbies can get basic stuff to help fit themselves while learning basics of fighting rats while not having to to mine for several weeks straight and get bored of game at same time. Mission runners get a side source of income, which might lead them into building valuable stuff and selling stuff for below the true value of the items (ships). Which newer players that are isk tight could possibly afford.
As for hardcore manufacturers, if I can make T1 items and make profit, you should be able to do it easier and way better then me. And with the t1 drops that get reprocessed, that provides raw material for builders. Hardcore miners might not like because they believe that brings down prices. Then stockpile, switch ore type or move or combination. I know a lot of miners that stockpile during low price ranges then sell when high prices return. Some stockpile, if prices stay low, they go into manufacturing stuff for self and market. And a few of the brave miners, get into Lets Make a Deal, swapping, trading, dealing in the markets.
This is my solution,and views, I could be wrong. Its a game, lets have FUN.
FLY SAFE

TheBlueMonkey
Gallente
Fags R Us
Posted - 2009.10.12 11:39:00 - [4]
 

People do appear to be viewing this from one side, that being "T1 mod production isn't worth it"

If you remove meta 0 or worse still remove all mod drops then watch the zydrine and megacyte mineral markets spike.

If you change it so that they just drop ammo then that's just pushing the same issue onto anyone who produces ammo.

If you change the reprocessing values you're just going to push the minerals markets way up.

Not only that but how happy are the mission runners going to be when they no longer get arbalest launchers and such?

It's not a straight forward issue.

Personally,
I think that T1 should get a boost and be in the middle of the meta table, T2 should be almost the top just below faction\complex\officer mods and also be removed from rat drops and replaced with a lower meta level item.

That way, the materials in high sec are left alone, T1 has more of a purpose.

Mission runners are still happy and industrial types would hopefully get some better business.

That's just my thoughts, although there are defiantly things I haven't considered.

XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
Posted - 2009.10.12 12:07:00 - [5]
 

Originally by: TheBlueMonkey


If you remove meta 0 or worse still remove all mod drops then watch the zydrine and megacyte mineral markets spike.




Yes please LaughingLaughingLaughing

Dannerkongen
Posted - 2009.10.12 12:14:00 - [6]
 

so u guys want it to be less profitable to do hard work in missions so u sissygirls can make more money afk mining! is that it?



XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
Posted - 2009.10.12 13:03:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Dannerkongen
so u guys want it to be less profitable to do hard work in missions so u sissygirls can make more money afk mining! is that it?





risk v. reward

ABC mining in 0.0 is a tad bit riskier than cozy high sec lvl 4 mission running (lol hard work in missions)

as stated though, other potential benefit is a nice boost to T1 module production for the budding industrialists

Laruant Wiggins
Gallente
Posted - 2009.10.12 13:46:00 - [8]
 

Simpler solution, if players can't build it then it can't be recycled.
I'm not talking about the individual player, why should I be allowed to recycle a named module that no one can build?
Other adjustments would be needed, like no meta 0 drops.

From a mission runner.

Cutie Chaser
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2009.10.12 16:53:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Laruant Wiggins
why should I be allowed to recycle a named module that no one can build?


Assumably, the reason is because that module is also made of minerals, the same as the equivalent T1 meta 0 module. If they were not able to be reprocessed people would just dump them on the market at ridiculously low prices to get rid of them, and the T1 market would be in an even worse state.


foobarx
Posted - 2009.10.12 16:56:00 - [10]
 

Quote:
People do appear to be viewing this from one side, that being "T1 mod production isn't worth it"

That's not the problem at all. The problem is the distortion of the mineral market. Between the loot drops and compounds in the drone regions, it just doesn't make sense to do lowsec mining anymore. The risk is huge, and the reward is less than that of mining LVL 1 mission veldspar in highsec.

T1 mod production will never be worth doing because there's virtually no barrier to entry. The market will be swamped by people who buy blueprints and start producing without figuring out whether they'll make money. We already see this problem in invention, something that takes more skill and more up-front cash.

Catherine Frasier
Posted - 2009.10.12 17:15:00 - [11]
 

Originally by: TheBlueMonkey
If you remove meta 0 or worse still remove all mod drops then watch the zydrine and megacyte mineral markets spike.
So what? Why is that prohibitive (or even bad)?

Originally by: TheBlueMonkey
If you change the reprocessing values you're just going to push the minerals markets way up.
Again, so what?

Originally by: TheBlueMonkey
Not only that but how happy are the mission runners going to be when they no longer get arbalest launchers and such?
Arbs are not meta 0.

Yarinor
Capital Construction Research
Pioneer Alliance
Posted - 2009.10.12 21:01:00 - [12]
 

Edited by: Yarinor on 12/10/2009 21:03:24
Originally by: Dannerkongen
so u guys want it to be less profitable to do hard work in missions so u sissygirls can make more money afk mining! is that it?



Tbh, I think most 0.0 miners would be happy if mining 0.0 could even compare to running missions with 0 risk in highsec.

Edit; I've been thinking of something, that may or may not be possible to do, I just want to do a proper writeup before suggesting it.

Adunh Slavy
Ammatar Trade Syndicate
Posted - 2009.10.12 22:02:00 - [13]
 

Jumping back in my thread :)

The idea is that T1 production takes twice as many minerals but reprocessing remains the same. Now a widget refines to 100 trit and takes 100 trit to make. The suggestion is that the widget will take 200 trit to make but still refine to 100 trit.

If demand doubles, prices of minerals should go up. Mission runners won't be able to refine as much as a percentage of the basket but their total reward would go up. Miners will have more demand for their product as well.

This would need to be balanced with insurance too. I can imagine arguments for either keeping it the same as it is now or doubling it.

So, the question is, would it be better to double platinum insurance payout as well or keep it as is, which would be 50% of the new base value.

Sungas
Posted - 2009.10.13 01:01:00 - [14]
 

Edited by: Sungas on 13/10/2009 01:13:58
Edited by: Sungas on 13/10/2009 01:07:02
Edited by: Sungas on 13/10/2009 01:06:12
Edited by: Sungas on 13/10/2009 01:04:28
Edited by: Sungas on 13/10/2009 01:03:12
For a mission runner, how much time investment does it take to get to Scrap metal processing?

Figure in metalurgy to five, refining and refining efficiency to five. A decent chunk of time. Then to get to those drops that are worthwhile, you need to get skills up to run level four missions.
Further, the ability (and time) needed to haul the loot back to station (with risk).

Looks like decent time/skill investment to me.

For a miner, you need Mining, Astrogeolgy, Hauling, and Exhumer skills. Another decent (and comparable) chunk of skill investment.


Miners don't have to work exclusively in 0.0 and battleships are not confined to hunting in empire space.
The boundries are not as set and the risks are not as clearly defined as some would like us to believe.

The real question is (as the OP points out):
How do you make it fair for both sides of the argument?

Perhaps eliminate many of the drops, but compensate with more ISK (roughly equal to the value of the now missing drops). Resulting in the mission runners having increased buying power to buy from the manufacuring types?

Borun Tal
Minmatar
Space Pods Inc
Posted - 2009.10.13 01:06:00 - [15]
 

It ain't broke so don't fix it.

ps: five f'ing minutes still?!?! REALLY?? CCP, you need to hire a web developer since you aren't addressing the problem. Drop me a line.

Talon Calais
Defilers Of The Cross
Posted - 2009.10.13 03:53:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Borun Tal

ps: five f'ing minutes still?!?! REALLY?? CCP, you need to hire a web developer since you aren't addressing the problem. Drop me a line.

I haven't seen a single spam thread since, I would say they addressed the problem perfectly.

foobarx
Posted - 2009.10.13 05:03:00 - [17]
 

Quote:
If you remove meta 0 or worse still remove all mod drops then watch the zydrine and megacyte mineral markets spike.

...

If you change the reprocessing values you're just going to push the minerals markets way up.

Yes, and that would be a good thing. Mineral prices are too low right now. To the point where you're sacrificing a great deal of ISK by mining instead of running missions.

Miners used to be the base of the EVE ecosystem in lowsec, and it made the game more fun. People would take the risk of being blown up because the minerals were worth it. The presence of miners meant the pirates had people to hunt besides each other and two-day-old characters on their first foray out of highsec.

Once the price of the mid-range minerals dropped the whole thing fell apart. Personally I'd like to see a mining capital ship that can grind up asteroids three or four times as fast as a Hulk but can't be taken into highsec, along with the complete removal of T1 mission loot drops.

I'd like to see compound drops in the drone regions removed as well, but that wouldn't be fair to the people who spent a lot of time and effort securing a piece of that pie. Not sure what to do there.

XXSketchxx
Gallente
Remote Soviet Industries
Posted - 2009.10.13 12:16:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: foobarx


I'd like to see compound drops in the drone regions removed as well, but that wouldn't be fair to the people who spent a lot of time and effort securing a piece of that pie. Not sure what to do there.


Simple. Convert compounds into tags bought by NPCs for fixed prices like the Sleeper things.

This will irritate a lot of people who farm rogue drones for compounds to build supercaps and whatnot, but oh well. It will boost the mid-range mineral market to a great degree and those people will just have to get along like all the other 0.0 entities do.

If I'm not mistaken, CCP themselves have said that the compound drops from the drone regions were a bad idea. The statistics are there in the quarterly report (I think something like 15-20% of minerals come from "ratting"). It needs to be fixed.

Rachel Voegel
San Matar Trucking Company
Posted - 2009.10.14 17:41:00 - [19]
 

Edited by: Rachel Voegel on 14/10/2009 17:42:01

Originally by: MightyRhinox
I think the simplest solution would be to remove meta 0 module drops altogether

Many of us mission runners would like that too. The time spent sorting the meta 0 loot from the valuable loot actually costs us money. Just remove meta 0 loot without any replacements.

Qui Shon
Posted - 2009.10.16 20:01:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Qui Shon on 16/10/2009 20:01:45
Originally by: Rachel Voegel
Edited by: Rachel Voegel on 14/10/2009 17:42:01

Originally by: MightyRhinox
I think the simplest solution would be to remove meta 0 module drops altogether

Many of us mission runners would like that too. The time spent sorting the meta 0 loot from the valuable loot actually costs us money. Just remove meta 0 loot without any replacements.


Bar a select number of Meta4 items, maybe, possibly one or two meta3, T1 (meta0) is more valuable then named.

Bluntroller
Posted - 2009.10.17 03:44:00 - [21]
 

one solution is to have rats not drop base tech 1 modules. then add a meta zero module that rats drop but refine into half of a normal tech 1 module

Rachel Voegel
San Matar Trucking Company
Posted - 2009.10.19 16:09:00 - [22]
 

I tend to reprocess most meta 0 loot, only notable exception are 'large' items (guns, shield extenders, etc).

Kenn
Caldari
McKae Industries and Research
Posted - 2009.10.19 18:03:00 - [23]
 

I think a huge factor is left out of this game that being the NPC. NPC corporations buy goods off the market but they don't seem to influence prices (Someone correct me if I am wrong). This is because CCP wanted a dynamic market run by players only. The problem is the players are in a universe that is supposed to be populated by the umpteenillions of civilians who have needs for these products (Yeah Govenor Joe Bloe has to buy shield hardeners to supply his fledgling capsuleers he groomed to protect his planet). I don't see the influences on the market from these sources.

I have seen products sold below the price it takes to manufacture them. This is often due to players manufacturing off of refined loot drops or selling loot at way below manufacturing costs. Realistically this would not be a steady supply for a government or corporation (someone had to make that product the rat dropped).

So these items are artificially appearing on the market. They should be artificially removed through the NPC as thier appearance is throwing the market off and I am not so sure the devs had this in mind. Player A gets loot from a rat and puts it on the market. Player B bids a price 20 percent below the manufacturing cost or more (We all see the battleship for 1 isk on the buying lists). Player A is lazy or just too busy to check the proper pricing for his goods or competition is just stiff and so the player simply sells. His loss you say. Really? Well a lot of people are doing just that and it affects all of us or else there wouldn't be a T1 problem.

Player A got his money for next to nothing (cost of ammo) and probably couldn't care less. Player B got the item for next to nothing and is just delighted. The rest of us are struggling with a sagging market.

By putting a demand on the item from the NPC side a lot of that would disappear. It doesn't have to be a stellar demand just one that get's rid of the 1 ISK bidding and nudges T1 back to the mainstream where it belongs. T2 and 3 are not mainstream technologies. They were supposed to be cutting edge.

If I am wrong about the NPC influence then I would say the demand is not high enough to affect prices. Demand drives a market and clearly T1 is getting stuck.

Players are not going to use a T1 mod when T2 is attainable. In spite of the hurdels put in front of T2 and 3 these items are readily available and have flooded the market. They are a far cry from being in trouble but T1 has seriously been neglected as a result. Only the NPC can take up the slack in demand at this point without further warping the game beyond recognition.

Ukucia
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.10.19 22:03:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Adunh Slavy
The idea is that T1 production takes twice as many minerals but reprocessing remains the same. Now a widget refines to 100 trit and takes 100 trit to make. The suggestion is that the widget will take 200 trit to make but still refine to 100 trit.

I don't understand what problem you're trying to solve.

T1 production still would not occur, because T1 drops would still be 'free' to the noobs so they'll price them well below mineral cost. Your 'solution' causes the T1 production problem to get much, much worse because you doubled the material cost.

Cutting out (or reducing) meta 0 drops solves the T1 production problem, as well as boosting mining. The only downside is people who 'mine' with weapons are hurt, but the fact that this is a viable method of mining is a flaw, not something to be encouraged.

Misanthra
Posted - 2009.10.20 05:53:00 - [25]
 

Edited by: Misanthra on 20/10/2009 05:54:22
Personally, I don't see a problem. I run a combat main with a miner/indy alt (this toon in fact). I like my loot drops, the iso/mega/zydrine keeps my caracals and drakes fed mixed with the odd mining ops during the week with the retriever. With some left over for sales. Loot melt downs keep my non-empire min runs looking for bulk cheap pricing down to about once a week with a few good nights or 2 of lv 2's and 3's (just broke 3, drake needs some tweaking to be farm worthy).

Nerfing/removing loot would hurt the mission runners. We pull from a random mission generator. Sometimes I pull missions that fill up my salvage spec cormorant on the main and rake in mad rat bounties and mission rewards. Sometimes...I am making 14 jump round trips on crap courier missions for little pay. Or if you hit up command type mission killing your enemy faction...not so great money (no bounties like with rat kill missions), usually crap salvage, and dogtags. very little loot. What little they get has to put some iskies in the wallet somehow.

Really is a bad cycle. you hurt for T1 because of this (trust me I know, when in indy mode I see the stupid low prices and go wth )...but your mission running customers who make less money won't be buying your T2 stuff down the line.


Eve is a combat game with an economy attached to it. Hence they cater to it and get people to do it. Its in all facets of the game. Want better broker deals, better run some missions for the station owner's agents. Want to be a miner, put down the drill pick up a gun (or drone boat like this toon does) bang out some missions and voila, couple missions later station refinery cut is starts to chip away (small but every pebble helps in time).

Jekyl Eraser
Posted - 2009.10.20 12:06:00 - [26]
 

Originally by: TheBlueMonkey
I think that T1 should get a boost and be in the middle of the meta table


good one!

boost T1 items to somewhere between meta 1 and meta 2 and reduce drop rates to the same as meta 3

Kylar Renpurs
Dusk Blade
Posted - 2009.10.20 13:10:00 - [27]
 

Quote:
I think the simplest solution would be to remove meta 0 module drops altogether (keep the named mods) and maybe replace them with increased ammo drops.


This dammit. No other solution makes any sense compared to this, although I'd remove ammo too and just leave it at named modules in loot.


 

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