open All Channels
seplocked Market Discussions
blankseplocked Dominion market analysis : sky's the limit on technetium (long term)
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (56)

Author Topic

Xylopia
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2009.11.03 02:49:00 - [31]
 

Edited by: xylopia on 03/11/2009 04:43:15
You are such a big *MORON*, Akita! Why-oh-why do you have to screw my fun? Just why you do that? I'll remember this for years to come.Evil or Very Mad

Heh, in fact, I was out into RL schedule when 1st wave of market speculation was on its way. Disappointed, I started to breaking down the new raw moon mineral requirement based on ship transaction volume. I really wanted to know how high each material could shoot up. (*I have to be cautious here that it is based on transaction # on forge region. The number of actual t2 ship manufacturing job finished is not really known to me. but.. is it to you? Very Happy)

And I can attest that Akita's result, "moon mineral breakdown in Dominion" (the one w/o alchemy in) matches very closely with mine. ( that means component transaction based analysis is in line w/ ship transaction based analysis. Hope this answers SencneS's question.)

So, there isn't much to add from me but here is what I believe.

1st) Alchemy is very much in question. I just don't know how many actually bother to do that. Even if CCP boosts it up 400%, you still have to take other factors into account; defense, and logistics. In order for an alchemy process to successfully run, enough amount of pairing R32 must be supplied and that is, let me tell ya, P.A.I.N. Plus, +1 silo and +1 simple reactor reduces POS defense so unless you are w/ 24/7 ready-to-dispatch defense fleet, you'd better off just mining the particular moon material. And that's what ppl do out there. Plus no-alchemy does not necessarily mean less profit to make.

2nd) I don't recall who it is, but someone said in a plex thread said 'a grand market manipulation only works when there is genuine demand'. The ages of Dys/Prom manipulation is completely over. The price won't go down that easy b/c they are in almost complete control, but the longer you sit in those market, the more you will likely loose. Thus, no. Dys/Prom do not affect the price of t2 ships anymore. (If you still doubt about it, watch what happens after Dec. 1)

Then, I'm daring to say we have only 1, yes only *one* switch that could effectively turn up the price of all t2 ship across the board. Yes, that is Neodymium.

Why so? simple. Neodymium->Nanotransistors, Platinum ->Sylramic Fibers, Fullerides, Tungsten Carbides, Ferrogel, and here comes the golden pair, Neodymium <- Alchemy -> Platinum. So let's say Neodymium hits 50k pu. What will happen to platinum and what will happen to Sylramic Fibers? When I found out that besides increased total reaction time, my jaw dropped on floor.

However, t2 ships will become cheaper. It is especially true after quick sylramic fibers fix. but it will take some painful time to get there.

*Btw, good work. Akita.

Xylopia
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2009.11.03 02:57:00 - [32]
 

Well, in fact, Akita's first analysis on sisi's alchemy change did not highlight neodymium that much. so ppl just went berserk on Sylramic Fibers.

Two words, Damn funny Wink

Xylopia
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2009.11.03 03:21:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Akita T

P.S. For instance - if anybody has a "game-wide moon count", please do post it. Exploitable moons only, of course... those in areas you can't anchor a harvester might as well be empty.
What I mean by that is simply "total number of moons for each material" (and maybe also total number of moons scanned), for as much space as you have knowledge of, from any possible source.
Not locations, just totals (and leave out the bottom 8 moon minerals and maybe even thulium, caesium and vanadium, those are next to irrelevant - if a moon only has those, you can add it to the total of "empty" moons ; only the other top 10 moon minerals are important, and dysp/prom/neod are the 3 most relevant ones, with plat/chro/cadm the next 3 most relevant ones, with technetium and mercury close behind, the remaining two are meh-so-so)... per entire constellation, per entire region, per entire game, whatever you have, if you have it.



google "moon map project" it contains 99.9% of all moon material spread out in entire lowsec. It shall give you a good idea as to how moon minerals are assigned.

Amarr Citizen 155
Nordar Innovations.
Posted - 2009.11.03 03:45:00 - [34]
 

Originally by: Cista2
Originally by: Akita T
Everybody else that read it most likely either went speechless and had nothing to add, or they're playing with the spreadsheets right now Twisted Evil

No, we're in Jita buying Thulium. (or was that Technetium? - I always get them mixed up)


I'm so confused by all the data I skipped right to buying anything and everything.....let the isk flow!

cosmoray
Perkone
Posted - 2009.11.03 03:49:00 - [35]
 

What is interesting about this data is that there was probably more money to be made on pre-patch speculation a few weeks ago, than the actual patch itself.

It is always key to be first to interpret the new patch data.

Xylopia
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2009.11.03 07:12:00 - [36]
 

Edited by: xylopia on 03/11/2009 07:31:40
Originally by: cosmoray
What is interesting about this data is that there was probably more money to be made on pre-patch speculation a few weeks ago, than the actual patch itself.

It is always key to be first to interpret the new patch data.


This is part of the table posted above.

before

dysprosium 21.60%
promethium 28.00%
neodymium 14.03%


after

dysprosium 12.45%
promethium 15.24%
neodymium 25.24%
----------------------

Since Akita did not post advanced materials' adj %, I'll come up w/ my own.
(you can calculate it from his sheet as well.)

before
Fermionic Condensates 11.69%
Fernite Carbide 18.29%
Nanotransistors 10.47%

after
Fermionic Condensates 1.28%
Fernite Carbide 5.54%
Nanotransistors 19.71%

*Sylramic Fibers went up to 37% then down to 19% after recent fix. Confused

(*these values are based on every t2 ship transaction only @ forge from 07.01.09-07.14.09, ship bp @ ME0, Comp bp @ perfect me)

I hope this rings a bell to you.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.11.03 07:28:00 - [37]
 

Originally by: Noonesoski
Originally by: Akita T
percentually

Is that even a word?

Now it is Laughing

Originally by: Kazuo Ishiguro
Originally by: TheLordofAllandNothing
Any ideas how the jump freighter market will be affected by the dominion changes? more expensive? cheaper? etc.

Devs have stated that JF build costs are not going to be tweaked, unlike most of the other T2 ships. So the best answer is probably obtained via analysis similar to Akita's.

Just a note on JFs - they were already very carbide-heavy, so there was no need to tweak them further. In fact, you could say all ships were tweak to match the JF ratios Wink

Originally by: xylopia
Well, in fact, Akita's first analysis on sisi's alchemy change did not highlight neodymium that much. so ppl just went berserk on Sylramic Fibers.
Two words, Damn funny Wink

My first analysis was based on just the moon-mineral make-up of one single ship type (Marauders), and it was a very rough approximation.
Obviously, it couldn't have had highlighted everything unless I had everything in (and now I do) Twisted Evil

Xylopia
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2009.11.03 07:47:00 - [38]
 

Originally by: Akita T

My first analysis was based on just the moon-mineral make-up of one single ship type (Marauders), and it was a very rough approximation.
Obviously, it couldn't have had highlighted everything unless I had everything in (and now I do) Twisted Evil



I'm not saying your analysis was wrong or anything. I'm saying ppl go blindly on things w/o their own research is ridiculous to me. In fact, I was amazed by the fact that you grab very quickly the would-be t2 material market situation w/ breaking down just one ship. It was good job in any engineer's term and work-efficiency wise. When I found out what you just posted about a while ago, it took me about two days and I was very glad that I knew not so many ppl knew. Twisted Evil

Well, there are few more very interesting things right off your analysis , but I'd just like to hear from you why CCP would like to stir up the big pond. I have my own reasoning but a person w/ more public credit make a better stand.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.11.03 08:03:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: xylopia
google "moon map project" it contains 99.9% of all moon material spread out in entire lowsec. It shall give you a good idea as to how moon minerals are assigned.

Found the old thread, and found Wolari's mention that he included them all in his map site.
http://evemaps.dotlan.net/region/moons
The 0.0 regions however, only 12 have decent coverage, the rest almost not at all... that's basically roughly half of EVE covered. Theoretically, that should be enough for a statistical analysis _IF_ moon-mineral distribution would be more or less even, but when you look at the totals per region, you can see the heavy disparities between each individual "valuable" minerals.
However, the regions that are in "high demand" (i.e. those usually fought over by historically powerful alliance blocs) tend to have pretty poor coverage there, and there's a very good chance those are precisely the regions with heavy numbers of moon minerals we're interested in.

Still, it's a start... and I did sum those all up...

Like Protheroe mentioned (he probably had the exact same source), out of those moons that are "public knowledge" (and assuming nobody fed in false data), there's at least 135 dysprosium and 179 promethium moons... in the roughly 50% mapped region of space.


Here's the full breakdown according to dotlan...



135 dysprosium ( 21.4% of BP256, 1.17% of grand total)
179 promethium ( 28.3% of BP256, 1.56% of grand total)
195 neodymium ( 30.9% of BP256, 1.69% of grand total)
123 thulium ( 19.5% of BP256, 1.07% of grand total)
230 technetium ( 36.4% of BP64, 2.00% of grand total)
349 mercury ( 55.2% of BP64, 3.03% of grand total)
473 hafnium ( 74.8% of BP64, 4.11% of grand total)
246 caesium ( 38.9% of BP64, 2.14% of grand total)
887 platinum ( 140.3% of BP16, 7.71% of grand total)
735 chromium ( 116.3% of BP16, 6.39% of grand total)
713 cadmium ( 112.8% of BP16, 6.20% of grand total)
602 vanadium ( 95.3% of BP16, 5.23% of grand total)
1381 scandium ( 218.5% of BP8, 12.00% of grand total)
1863 tungsten ( 294.8% of BP8, 16.19% of grand total)
2429 cobalt ( 384.3% of BP8, 21.11% of grand total)
965 titanium ( 152.7% of BP8, 8.39% of grand total)

632 total BP256 ( 5.49% of grand total)
1298 total BP64 ( 11.28% of grand total)
2937 total BP16 ( 25.53% of grand total)
6638 total BP8 ( 57.70% of grand total)

11505 total known moons



I'll make an alternate spreadsheet version based on THIS rarity spread only, see how that looks Wink

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.11.03 08:49:00 - [40]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 03/11/2009 09:05:35


Hmmz, from the initial adjusted rarities, the preliminary (pre-alchemy) situation looks ALMOST IDENTICAL to what we have seen so far, price-wise.
It appears that those 50% of scans were actually pretty damn representative of the overall moon distribution, so things will be radically changing... give me a couple more minutes to finish Twisted Evil


P.S. It also means something else : that CCP has been tacitly selling us bullcrap with regards to the moon mineral rarity, as implied by moon mineral base values.
But I guess we're the only ones to be blamed for that, eh ? Laughing



P.P.S. Wait a second this can't be right... ShockedShockedShocked holy mother of GOD, TECHNETIUM ! ShockedShockedShocked
You'll see in images what I mean in a few minutes.
Meanwhile, just the comparison sheet in Office97:
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/0911/T2_EVE_Dominion_comparison_v2_Office1997.zip (Linkage)
Full versions (2007 only) plus screenshots coming up soon...


Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.11.03 09:25:00 - [41]
 

Ok, first off, the initial screenshots (those of advanced materials usage) will not be changing, since, well, there's nothing to change there.
They remain valid, so I won't be re-posting them.

Now, here's the updated full Office2007 version :
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/0911/EVE_Dominion_v2_Office2007.zip (Linkage)

And here are the screenshots...

(Link to image : no alchemy)

http://img338.imageshack.us/img338/6174/dominionnoalchemy.gif

Now you see what I meant by "holy **** technetium"...

And here's with alchemy... Link to image : with alchemy

http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/8094/dominionwithalchemy.gif

Yeah...
Shocked
...my thoughts exactly.


I can only assume that the moon sample we collected so far is not completely representative of what we see in EVE if we look at all regions combined... but... the sample DID have a lot more technetium moons compared to mercury and hafnium, so I suppose it's kind of screwed-up if things are actually like this...

All hail our new Technetium overlords !
LaughingLaughingLaughing

Image changed to URL. Zymurgist

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.11.03 10:39:00 - [42]
 

Based on that, I'd say CCP has just a few options now :

1) they could decrease racial microprocessor usage (or at least amount of nanotransistors needed from, say, 5 to 3 or even just 2), the positive side-effect here would be a reduction in mercury usage (which is also a big contender currently, almost on par with promethium!) -- but that also reduces neodymium usage a bit (depending how much of what you reduce) among other things... so you shouldn't cut those TOO much, or else prom/dysp re-become the bottlenecks

2) they could decrease racial capacitor units usage (or amount of fullerides needed in them from, say, 15 to 7-8 or just even 5), and to be honest that would be just fine since the only other valuable material used there is platinum, which you'll be needing for "instead of neodymium" alchemy

A combination of 1+2 would work somewhat fine, IMO, but you're still looking at some weird stuff here... so here come the heavy-duty options Twisted Evil

3) introduce a whole new set of alchemy reactions, at even better rates (say, 1:3 er even 1:2), but for scandium/tungsten/cobalt/titanium -> technetium/mercury/hafnium/caesium

4) scrap the entire current reaction chain and start from scratch

Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Vahrokh Consulting
Posted - 2009.11.03 11:09:00 - [43]
 

Quote:

4) scrap the entire current reaction chain and start from scratch



This.

When a company openly admits they borked it hard (no, I won't link where they state that, no time and just do your *** homeworks (not aimed to Akita ofc)) and when their own players show more knowledge and even care than them, then it's time to fix the reasons why this is left to happen.

IE once it becomes publicly stated how alchemy values were derived from the inflated values of the long time exploit, *the next day* the alchemy values should have been changed. Not a duct tape approach that is nice as Minmatar roleplay but has really no place in a professional MMO.

Xylopia
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2009.11.03 11:27:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Based on that, I'd say CCP has just a few options now :

1) they could decrease racial microprocessor usage (or at least amount of nanotransistors needed from, say, 5 to 3 or even just 2), the positive side-effect here would be a reduction in mercury usage (which is also a big contender currently, almost on par with promethium!) -- but that also reduces neodymium usage a bit (depending how much of what you reduce) among other things... so you shouldn't cut those TOO much, or else prom/dysp re-become the bottlenecks

2) they could decrease racial capacitor units usage (or amount of fullerides needed in them from, say, 15 to 7-8 or just even 5), and to be honest that would be just fine since the only other valuable material used there is platinum, which you'll be needing for "instead of neodymium" alchemy

A combination of 1+2 would work somewhat fine, IMO, but you're still looking at some weird stuff here... so here come the heavy-duty options Twisted Evil

3) introduce a whole new set of alchemy reactions, at even better rates (say, 1:3 er even 1:2), but for scandium/tungsten/cobalt/titanium -> technetium/mercury/hafnium/caesium

4) scrap the entire current reaction chain and start from scratch



I'd vote for #3 but given the amount of time we have b4 Dec 1, I'd say we'll most likely see #1. If CCP go that way, Neo's potential value decreases a bit but it still is a significant boost anyway.

And I haven't been able to notice Technetium. Awesome work there. For me, as soon as I saw the whole line of nano-neo-plat boost from my work, I lost my mind over buying up those.

What I see is CCP wants to shuffle the whole moon values, and put 'em in an imbalance so that big guys go after moons they've put aside such as neo. So it's also possible that CCP would just let go of the current version of patch @ Sisi. That would definitely cause new political shape to emerge along the new sov mechanism. After all eve needs bloodbath, crushed bones, hammered meat, and, most of all, jaw-dropping dramas so more ppl to come subscribe. Twisted Evil

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.11.03 13:36:00 - [45]
 

Considering they already changed the racial armor plate sylramic fiber need from 30 to 10 (well, ok, they also bumped up plates usage hugely), it's not completely unlikely they might also change the racial capacitors to take less fullerides (especially since fulleride need would have otherwise gone up in Dominion).

So, I guess they'll probably do a bit of both with a twist :
* tone down the microprocessors by -25% or so (still noticeably more than what we have on TQ)
* INCREASE racial capacitor usage by around 20% to compensate for the drop in microprocessors
* reduce fullerides from 15 to 5 or thereabouts

Vhiskey
Caldari
Imperial Forces
Posted - 2009.11.03 13:52:00 - [46]
 

ccp again missed a chance

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.11.03 14:26:00 - [47]
 

Originally by: Akita T
So, I guess they'll probably do a bit of both with a twist :
* tone down the microprocessors by -25% or so (still noticeably more than what we have on TQ)
* INCREASE racial capacitor usage by around 20% to compensate for the drop in microprocessors
* reduce fullerides from 15 to 5 or thereabouts

GAAH, that wouldn't do much good either Evil or Very Mad
Technetium does indeed get closer to neodymium like that, but it's still over... and worse, CHROMIUM jumps above technetium in rarity...
LaughingLaughingLaughing


Verite Rendition
Caldari
F.R.E.E. Explorer
EVE Animal Control
Posted - 2009.11.03 15:23:00 - [48]
 

Edited by: Verite Rendition on 03/11/2009 15:25:52
Akita, I highly doubt your moon data is correct for the R32s.

1) They're racially distributed. Gurista space is heavy on Technetium (Deklein: 19 Tech, 2 Caes, 0 Haf/Merc; don't trust Dotlan), etc.

2) R32s are under-reported because they're generally worth so little.

I don't have any reason to believe there are as few Technetium moons as you list. I'd expect all of the R32s to be around in equal numbers.

Xylopia
Gallente
Center for Advanced Studies
Posted - 2009.11.03 15:38:00 - [49]
 

Edited by: xylopia on 03/11/2009 15:40:03
From my point of view, this whole t2 material change is just as significant as anything CCP would bring up in Dominion. For example take a look at how ppl come head to head over AF boost. That's just insane. Tbh, this...is more than that...isn't it? ask yourself. A lot more ppl need to step in moon mineral/reaction business, and all those untouched r8 moons need more loving care from players. Is it feasible in realistic sense? Dunno...You can see how chaotic the t2 market will be...

Otherwise we'll all witness a historical shortage of adv materials.

Naturally, I expected some sort of forum up-roar from alliance people about how this patch is unfair, imbalanced, CCP-malfunction, fail cascade and what-not, but it is dead quite except some arguments over how CVA could benefit from this patch and "oh, t2 ship will get cheapo again, Hooray!". nada. none.

I don't think it is about who's smart or not. It's more likely, in my theory, ppl care more about how this game "looks" rather than how this "works". So there's nothing to blame CCP for. CCP reacts exactly the way they need to. I suppose.

Anyway, I presumed I could just sit back and relax... Crying or Very sad...

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.11.03 16:20:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Verite Rendition
Akita, I highly doubt your moon data is correct for the R32s. They're racially distributed. Gurista space is heavy on Technetium (Deklein: 19 Tech, 2 Caes, 0 Haf/Merc; don't trust Dotlan), etc.

I certainly hope so, then it would be great Laughing
...but for some reason (explained below) I have a bad feeling that you might not be right.

Quote:
I don't have any reason to believe there are as few Technetium moons as you list. I'd expect all of the R32s to be around in equal numbers.

Well, if that was true for some reason, then you'd also expect dysprosium/promethium/neodymium moons to be around in equal numbers too (why only spread the "less valuable" moons evenly but the most valuable not?)... and in that case, the INITIAL analysis is the correct one (that on the first page).
However, as you can see, the numbers after I plugged in the moon count reported by dotlan matches more or less the actual prices of materials we were seeing on the market (high rarity -> high price), therefore I must regretfully consider that distribution as far more accurate than hypothetical numbers based on alleged rarity reported by CCP at some distant point in the past...

Turiel Demon
Minmatar
Celtic industries
Posted - 2009.11.03 17:35:00 - [51]
 

Edited by: Turiel Demon on 03/11/2009 17:37:23

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Akita T
So, I guess they'll probably do a bit of both with a twist :
* tone down the microprocessors by -25% or so (still noticeably more than what we have on TQ)
* INCREASE racial capacitor usage by around 20% to compensate for the drop in microprocessors
* reduce fullerides from 15 to 5 or thereabouts

GAAH, that wouldn't do much good either Evil or Very Mad
Technetium does indeed get closer to neodymium like that, but it's still over... and worse, CHROMIUM jumps above technetium in rarity...
LaughingLaughingLaughing




I don't see the harm in Chromium getting some love. If I've read your graph right isn't it already going to be the third most important value adjusted material behind Neodymium and Technecium?

/me quickly buys up a few million units of cheap chromium

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.11.03 18:07:00 - [52]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 04/11/2009 00:55:05

Originally by: Turiel Demon
I don't see the harm in Chromium getting some love.

Let's put things into perspective...

WHY do you think in the past two months dysprosium and promethium were so damn expensive, while everything else was nearly worthless ?
Because everybody had to wait for enough dysprosium and promethium to be mined in order to do anything, while other types of materials kept stockpiling higher and higher, until (some) people were forced to stop mining those types of minerals altogether because they became nearly worthless.

If the numbers are correct, then right now (or, well, in the recent past), the ENTIRE supply of dysprosium was being consumed with prices per unit reaching 160k or so from about 120k a year back, and about 98% of promethium supply was consumed, with prices hovering around 140k in the very recent past, after having been far below 100k a year ago.
The rest of materials, those that were using far less of the total possible capacity were only selling for a pittance compared to those two... none of them even reached 10k per unit - that's an absurdly low price... but that's the only price people were willing to pay, since they HAD to pay truckloads for the other two, which were crucial - if you didn't pay enough, you couldn't build.
So, you reached a point where nearly 90% of the VALUE in a T2 ship was derived from the cost of those two moon minerals which were consumed almost entirely.

Now, enter Dominion... suddenly, you need far less promethium and dysprosium, so prices for those two start dropping fast... however, you need a truckload more neodymium - but that's reasonable still, because there was more of it to begin with, so you could build more if neodymium would be the one material that's being completely eaten up... however, technetium usage has roughly DOUBLED in Dominion... the same items that are being traded right now only used about 60% of available technetium, but in Dominion the same items would eat up ALL of it, and then some ("120%", lol).
Basically, that would mean that T2 prices won't be going down, they'll be going UP, and most of the value that was previously split between promethium and dysprosium will be gobbled up by technetium... and it's just ONE mineral, so it takes ALL of it... say hello to 300k200k ISK/unit for technetium !
Of course, assuming the moon distribution data is even remotely relevant.

Now, you say, what would be the harm in chromium "getting some love" ?
Well... nothing... if you want chromium to cost 300k65k ISK per unit !

Before Dominion, the "top 8" usage rates (including estimated alchemy usage) out of total maximum possible production looked like this:
Dysprosium - 100%
Promethium - 97.8%
Technetium - 60.6%
Cadmium - 60.6%
Chromium - 57.2%
Neodymium - 45.0%
Platinum - 36.7%
Mercury - 33.3%

After Dominion, estimated usage rates (only difference being SiSi changed construction data) look like this right now for the "top 8":
Technetium - 100.0%
Chromium - 79.7%
Neodymium - 71.7%
Platinum - 54.4%
Dysprosium - 50.8%
Promethium - 47.8%
Mercury - 47.2%
Cadmium - 37.2%



The only way to have the price split between as many minerals as possible is to have the "adjusted rarity" for the most needed ones (as percentage of total potential production) be extremely close together.
Why extremely close together ? Well, see what a mere 2% difference meant for promethium-vs-dysprosium price !
ONE material has to be the bottleneck, that much is certain - you will always have a bottleneck.
The problem is you need to make the rest of the "want to be desirable" materials use up nearly their entire total potential stocks, or else their prices will drop to negligible levels, and only the fuel costs will determine their value.

Turiel Demon
Minmatar
Celtic industries
Posted - 2009.11.03 18:43:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Edited by: Akita T on 03/11/2009 18:33:33
Originally by: Turiel Demon
I don't see the harm in Chromium getting some love.

Let's put things into perspective...

WHY do you think in the past two months dysprosium and promethium were so damn expensive, while everything else was nearly worthless ?
Because everybody had to wait for enough dysprosium and promethium to be mined in order to do anything, while other types of materials kept stockpiling higher and higher, until (some) people were forced to stop mining those types of minerals altogether because they became nearly worthless.

If the numbers are correct, then right now (or, well, in the recent past), the ENTIRE supply of dysprosium was being consumed with prices per unit reaching 160k or so from about 120k a year back, and about 98% of promethium supply was consumed, with prices hovering around 140k in the very recent past, after having been far below 100k a year ago.
The rest of materials, those that were using far less of the total possible capacity were only selling for a pittance compared to those two... none of them even reached 10k per unit - that's an absurdly low price... but that's the only price people were willing to pay, since they HAD to pay truckloads for the other two, which were crucial - if you didn't pay enough, you couldn't build.
So, you reached a point where nearly 90% of the VALUE in a T2 ship was derived from the cost of those two moon minerals which were consumed almost entirely.

Now, enter Dominion... suddenly, you need far less promethium and dysprosium, so prices for those two start dropping fast... however, you need a truckload more neodymium - but that's reasonable still, because there was more of it to begin with, so you could build more if neodymium would be the one material that's being completely eaten up... however, technetium usage has roughly DOUBLED in Dominion... the same items that are being traded right now only used about 60% of available technetium, but in Dominion the same items would eat up ALL of it, and then some ("120%", lol).
Basically, that would mean that T2 prices won't be going down, they'll be going UP, and most of the value that was previously split between promethium and dysprosium will be gobbled up by technetium... and it's just ONE mineral, so it takes ALL of it... say hello to 300k ISK/unit for technetium !
Of course, assuming the moon distribution data is even remotely relevant.

Now, you say, what would be the harm in chromium "getting some love" ?
Well... nothing... if you want chromium to cost 300k ISK per unit !

Before Dominion, the "top 8" usage rates (including estimated alchemy usage) out of total maximum possible production looked like this:
Dysprosium - 100%
Promethium - 97.8%

After Dominion, estimated usage rates (only difference being SiSi changed construction data) look like this right now for the "top 8":
Technetium - 100.0%
Chromium - 79.7%
Neodymium - 71.7%



The only way to have the price split between as many minerals as possible is to have the "adjusted rarity" for the most needed ones (as percentage of total potential production) be extremely close together.
Why extremely close together ? Well, see what a mere 2% difference meant for promethium-vs-dysprosium price !
ONE material has to be the bottleneck, that much is certain - you will always have a bottleneck.
The problem is you need to make the rest of the "want to be desirable" materials use up nearly their entire total potential stocks, or else their prices will drop to negligible levels, and only the fuel costs will determine their value.



For a throwaway line, that got a hell of a lot more explanation than I bargained for Shocked

Seriously though, greatest thanks for explaining it in words of one sylable so I could understand Please visit your user settings to re-enable images.

Alain Kinsella
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.11.03 20:23:00 - [54]
 

Has there been any further information on what the 'system upgrades' will be?

If players will be able to change the composition of their moons over time, that's going to affect these numbers a 'bit.'

Otherwise, great analysis.

/salute
--A_K

Aresse
Posted - 2009.11.03 21:01:00 - [55]
 

Yes, bow down to the Tech moon owners.

...anyone want some cheap Tech? 150k a unit! Get it before it skyrockets!

Aineko Macx
Posted - 2009.11.03 21:01:00 - [56]
 

Originally by: Alain Kinsella
If players will be able to change the composition of their moons over time, that's going to affect these numbers a 'bit.'

There has been no word on upgrades for moon mining.

Tempted to call the OP a manipulation attempt, but interesting. Ofc Jita has reacted ;)

Dretzle Omega
Caldari
Global Economy Experts
Posted - 2009.11.03 21:14:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Aineko Macx
Tempted to call the OP a manipulation attempt, but interesting. Ofc Jita has reacted ;)


In normal circumstances, perhaps, but this is Akita and he loves his spreadsheets. Very Happy

Cista2
Hydra Investment Fund
Posted - 2009.11.03 21:21:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Aineko Macx
Tempted to call the OP a manipulation attempt, but interesting. Ofc Jita has reacted ;)
Yeah, someone chose to push Technetium from 3k to 6k in Jita today.

Aresse
Posted - 2009.11.03 21:28:00 - [59]
 

Originally by: Cista2
Originally by: Aineko Macx
Tempted to call the OP a manipulation attempt, but interesting. Ofc Jita has reacted ;)
Yeah, someone chose to push Technetium from 3k to 6k in Jita today.


*blush*

Makes sense I guess. I can't confirm anything at the moment, but I'll take Akita's word for it for now.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2009.11.03 21:42:00 - [60]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 05/11/2009 14:51:57


Personally, I'd make money either way, no matter what the new bottleneck is.

Ok, ok, not quite "no matter what", but I have most of the best candidates in stock - even if none turn out to be "the one", they're still going to go up in total.
I got most of my bases covered weeks ago when I raised the capital (Linkage) - the one big certainty was that promethium and dysprosium would be going down, so there were plenty of candidates for what would go up (putting all my ISK on a single item or a small set of items would have been a gamble, and I don't like to gamble).

I do admit that I did recently rise my technetium stock a bit compared to what I already had stockpiled from before, but not by TOO much, since I still hope CCP will realize the mistake they're about to do and correct it (so why hold onto big stocks of stuff that's not going to be all that valuable after they almost unavoidably nuke it in the completely opposite direction).
P.S. If you HAVE to know, only a small % of my stock is in technetium, and I can't find more at a reasonable price anymore...
...anybody want to sell me technetium at 3-4k per unit ? I'll buy Twisted Evil


Pages: first : previous : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (56)

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