open All Channels
seplocked EVE Information Portal
blankseplocked New Dev Blog: The Circle of Life
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: first : previous : ... 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 : last (24)

Author Topic

Erovicious
Sebiestor Tribe
Posted - 2010.04.05 18:21:00 - [571]
 

Originally by: Kerfira
Edited by: Kerfira on 05/04/2010 17:27:29
Mistake spotted and marked in red! You probably didn't align either, didn't tank, and didn't pay attention!
Instead, you sacrificed safety for gain, i.e. KNOWINGLY ran a risk, and then effed up! Laughing

COMPLETELY your own fault! You KNOW what the rules of the game are, and still you expect it to somehow be different for you Rolling Eyes

If think a 'GB2WOW' is in place here, or maybe a 'Hello Kitty Online is that way -->' since you don't seem to grasp that this is a game where YOU and YOU ALONE are responsible for your security, and for what happens when you don't do it!
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.

Have a nice day, and hope you get blown up again next time you do the same stunt Twisted Evil


So much idiocy in such little space, I'm not even sure where to start. Clearly I can align and be ready to react to every neutral that enters an Empire system. Clearly I can tank a ship that has no CPU to fit one (and wouldn't matter anyways with the DPS suicide fits provide for). Rolling Eyes

The morons you think you're fit to speak to are elsewhere. I know what this game is and I know its risks. The game is designed with the 'cold dark lawless lands' of Nullsec to be the dangerous place to live. Pull your nose out of your Hello Kitty references and think a bit bigger than your next insult. When it is safer to mine where there is no law, then a basic part of the game is broken.

Grab a copy of EFT and fit a Mack(cuz god knows you've probably never sat in one) and let me know just how well you can 'tank' a Mack against a suicide ganker then maybe we'll have a more intelligent discourse.

Dogeatdog
Posted - 2010.04.05 18:27:00 - [572]
 

Will there be planets to mine in wormhole?

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2010.04.05 18:39:00 - [573]
 

Edited by: Kerfira on 05/04/2010 18:48:56
Originally by: Erovicious
Clearly I can align and be ready to react to every neutral that enters an Empire system.

Yes. You can! Align at speed, warp out when a combat ship lands near you.... It's not rocket science!
Originally by: Erovicious
Clearly I can tank a ship that has no CPU to fit one (and wouldn't matter anyways with the DPS suicide fits provide for).

You can tank it enough to survive the alpha (>14k EHP), after which you should have warped out. You should actually have warped out BEFORE he hit the first time as you got 5-10 seconds where you can see him arriving before he can lock and fire at you.

So, you chose not to align, you chose not to warp out, and you chose not to tank...

You had all these options for protecting yourself, chose not to do ANY of them, and still blame anyone but yourself for what happened.... Pathetic Rolling Eyes

I really think you'd be much happier in "Hello Kitty Online" (that was a real suggestion, not an insult) since this game is clearly to complex and tough for you... Twisted Evil
Originally by: Erovicious
I know what this game is and I know its risks.

I think you've just very clearly demonstrated that you do not Laughing
Originally by: Erovicious
The game is designed with the 'cold dark lawless lands' of Nullsec to be the dangerous place to live.

No, this game is designed to be dangerous EVERYWHERE!

Cang Zar
Posted - 2010.04.05 19:46:00 - [574]
 

Originally by: Kerfira
Edited by: Kerfira on 05/04/2010 17:27:29
Originally by: Erovicious
Originally by: Kerfira
Stop whining.... If you get suicided, the responsibility for it is YOURS, since it is so easy to avoid...

So sick of seeing this. I fit up a mackinaw with maximum yield for mining ice, and went out to mine up some Isotopes for my JF before heading out to 0.0. Only planning on being there for 45m to an hour.

I head out to the ice belt and before I've finished three cycles - I'm blown up by a torp Raven. I'm not afk, I'm not macroing, I'm simply mining ice. I AM NOT responsible for some kiddie-**** loving infant that gets his rocks off by killing ships that cannot otherwise defend themselves (thanks CCP) - and getting paid to do it by a completely f'd up Insurance system.

It truly is a sad state of affairs when 0.0 is SAFER than Empire.

Mistake spotted and marked in red! You probably didn't align either, didn't tank, and didn't pay attention!
Instead, you sacrificed safety for gain, i.e. KNOWINGLY ran a risk, and then effed up! Laughing

COMPLETELY your own fault! You KNOW what the rules of the game are, and still you expect it to somehow be different for you Rolling Eyes

If think a 'GB2WOW' is in place here, or maybe a 'Hello Kitty Online is that way -->' since you don't seem to grasp that this is a game where YOU and YOU ALONE are responsible for your security, and for what happens when you don't do it!
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.

Have a nice day, and hope you get blown up again next time you do the same stunt Twisted Evil


Effing hell, you're full of yourself, what a pompous **** you are.

I wanted to write something about how CCP are infact allowing and limiting griefing in practically every game-design decision they make, and they tend to evaluate these by how easy/hard it actually is, combined with some variations over high/low/null sec possibilities. It's not just a grief game, there are hundreds of ways the game limits griefing, by the way the systems are implemented alone! Just because it's allowed in it's current form, doesnt mean you have to leave the game for hello kitty, if you think something should be changed. Just because the goal is that it should be a harsh and cruel world, doesnt mean we can steal **** from each others hangars for instance, or pick each others wallets and it doesnt mean that suicide ganking NECESSARILY should be as effortless and easy as it is, it's not a key component of a harsh and cruel gameworld. But whatever, tbh after reading your post history, I can see you're too busy posting roll-eye smilies and quoting yourself, to engage in any form of reasonable debate.

Cang out

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2010.04.05 20:19:00 - [575]
 

Originally by: Cang Zar
Major emorage

ROFL Laughing

The point is that some people accept that this game has rules and live by them, accepting that some rules mean that sometime you lose stuff. Others run crying back to their mommies when the big bad gankers take their pretty ship from them...

Whether you like it or not, ganking IS allowed by the games rules!
When you play chess, I guess you and the other guy also whinge and cry when you're told that no, you're not allowed move backwards with your pawns, or diagonally with your towers...

There are MYRIAD of ways of avoid getting suicide ganked, but the people who don't use them (most likely because they're AFK'ing) ALWAYS blames the game instead of their own stupidity/laziness, and often run flaming to the forum like you Cool

And yes, it really IS pathetic that you're not able to play the game by its rules!

Liang Nuren
Posted - 2010.04.05 20:49:00 - [576]
 

Originally by: Erovicious
Huh? Where did I say anything about it being free? And if everyone stopped mining ice, there'd be a lot of POS's in trouble and cap ships sitting still. This is a meritless and senseless response.


You implied it's free. The simple fact of the matter is that ice mining isn't a profitable business when compared to other forms of income. You would have been better to spend your time on one of those other forms of income and then buy the ice off of some other poor ******* that wants to waste his time.

And yes, if nobody mined ice then there would be a lot of POSes and caps in trouble... but the price would rise to an equilibrium.

-Liang

Red Raider
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.04.05 21:20:00 - [577]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul

Originally by: Red Raider
Originally by: Venkul Mul

You know some T1 module or ship that has morphite in its BPO?



If I do what do I get?

Prototype Cloaking Device


Good find. So 2% of all morphite come from reprocessing Prototype Cloaking Devices?
And can you give us a link to the NPC that is dropping them?


I found what you requested though by luck because I just happened to be looking at it already. I have no idea if it drops because I don't pay attention to the loot, most of the time I don't loot missions at all and I thought it was 1% not 2% which due to CCP's method of rounding would mean if even one dropped a day and got repro'd it would be 1% per day. I don't recall it ever dropping in my experience though but I have also never looted a Gisti X Type shield booster either.

Originally by: Venkul Mul

Originally by: Red Raider

Meta 0's demand is not as low as you think since it's required to build Tech II which has significant market share in modules. Look at the demand for tech II modules in the QEN. 28k Tech II 1400mm howitzers in December and 37k Tracking Computer II's in December. Thats a lot of meta 0 modules being consumed.



You have an idea of how incredibly tedious and inefficient is running around to gather the meta0 modules you use for T2 production? you do that only if you have a small production going.

If you produce some large number of T2 items you will have a semi skilled alt using some production slot to produce them in the same location where you produce the T2 ststuff.
You get some from buy order but it is secondary to what you produce.


Thats all well in good but you are missing the point.

Originally by: Red Raider
Third, meta 0 production will consume minerals (hopefully) due to the need for meta 0 modules in tech II production. The trick is to reduce insurance as an ISK faucet due to the deflationary effects fraud has on the buying power of ISK.


Right now a ton of minerals are being injected into the economy via meta 0 loot. The MD forum has a post laying out a single module's actions supplying .5% of the trit moved every day. Right now how T2 producers get their meta 0 modules is irrelevant because the consumption is being offset by mission loot at least a little but probably in full and then some. If you reduce meta 0 drop rates to introduce less minerals to the market than T2 production consumes you create a positive demand factor on minerals. Any reduction creates positive demand but what we need is a meaningful reduction which if I was pushing the buttons would be a 90% reduction in ALL meta 0 loot.

Gunner77
Posted - 2010.04.05 22:18:00 - [578]
 

Edited by: Gunner77 on 05/04/2010 22:21:47
Originally by: Red Raider
Originally by: Red Raider
Third, meta 0 production will consume minerals (hopefully) due to the need for meta 0 modules in tech II production. The trick is to reduce insurance as an ISK faucet due to the deflationary effects fraud has on the buying power of ISK.


Right now a ton of minerals are being injected into the economy via meta 0 loot. The MD forum has a post laying out a single module's actions supplying .5% of the trit moved every day. Right now how T2 producers get their meta 0 modules is irrelevant because the consumption is being offset by mission loot at least a little but probably in full and then some. If you reduce meta 0 drop rates to introduce less minerals to the market than T2 production consumes you create a positive demand factor on minerals. Any reduction creates positive demand but what we need is a meaningful reduction which if I was pushing the buttons would be a 90% reduction in ALL meta 0 loot.


Supply and Demand Curves

First, cutting supply does not "create a positive demand factor", it simply shifts the supply line to the left, increasing the equilibrium price.

Deflation

Second, Insurance does not create deflation. Insurance 'fraud' creates a floor for the mineral prices, keeping items at a higher price than they would otherwise be, if they were at the equilibrium price. Deflation in Eve is caused by increasing supply and isk hoarding.

The effect I am most interested in, is how far will the mineral prices fall? With the price floor removed on minerals, will the entire market crash? Everything will be cheaper to build as mineral prices fall. Or, will the simultaneous removal of meta0 loot cut supply enough to keep mineral prices where they are currently at?

TL;DR: Interesting stuff in the market is coming, if the changes go through.

Cang Zar
Posted - 2010.04.05 22:39:00 - [579]
 

Originally by: Kerfira
Originally by: Cang Zar
Major emorage

ROFL Laughing

The point is that some people accept that this game has rules and live by them, accepting that some rules mean that sometime you lose stuff. Others run crying back to their mommies when the big bad gankers take their pretty ship from them...

Whether you like it or not, ganking IS allowed by the games rules!
When you play chess, I guess you and the other guy also whinge and cry when you're told that no, you're not allowed move backwards with your pawns, or diagonally with your towers...

There are MYRIAD of ways of avoid getting suicide ganked, but the people who don't use them (most likely because they're AFK'ing) ALWAYS blames the game instead of their own stupidity/laziness, and often run flaming to the forum like you Cool

And yes, it really IS pathetic that you're not able to play the game by its rules!


Why dont you completely miss the point and go post a passive-aggressive, smug, self-glorifying post about it.CoolughYARRRR!!Rolling EyesRolling EyesRolling EyesCool

Oh wai...

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2010.04.05 23:03:00 - [580]
 

Originally by: Cang Zar
Why dont you completely miss the point...

You had a point?? I went through your post with a fine-toothed comb, and there wasn't any....

The other guy was whinging that he lost his Mackinaw.... BECAUSE he didn't bother taking the few basic precautions that could have saved him.
Then he goes off and blames the game and not his own stupidity/laziness (which was the real cause of his loss). Then you barge in and support him....

The game has rules, sometimes they change, but you play a game by the rules it HAS, not the rules you wish it had!

You may lobby on the side to change those rules (I do that often enough myself), but you can NEVER use your make-believe rules as an excuse for any loss of precious internet space-game money caused by your own stupidity or laziness! Doing that is just pathetic since you KNOW what the current rules are!

If you can not play a game by its rules, then it is indeed best for you to stop playing that game!

If I play football (European, not the US sissy-rugby), and start whinging that I lost the ball and the opposing team scored a goal because I wasn't allowed to use my hands (not playing as a goalkeeper), I'd be laughed out of the room!
This is EXACTLY the same situation!

Just saying things as they are... Cool

Rumtum Digger
Posted - 2010.04.06 01:38:00 - [581]
 

I haven't read all 20 pages of this forum, so apolo if this has been tabled before.

How will the Scrapmetal skill be affected by the change in reprocessed loot?

Dex Nederland
Caldari
Lai Dai Infinity Systems
Posted - 2010.04.06 01:55:00 - [582]
 

Technical question to dev team:

Is the database used to generate insurance values the same database used to determine the base value in the contracts process?

I ask since it appears to be the only in game utility able to quickly determine any value for a variety of items.

Demosai
Posted - 2010.04.06 05:13:00 - [583]
 

Two questions that I hope might be seen to the devs through the middle of the flame wars.

First, in regards to probing especially, as it has started to become a very abused system in a lot of high-sec high-pop misison running areas. (Motsu for one). There are a number of day-old (to week-old or so) characters scanning and stealing salvage from mission runners. Can't do anything about it cause well, it's not punishable in any way. Would it be possible to tag the skills necessary to scan using combat probes, notably Astrometrics as "Not available to trial accounts"? (I would suggest salvaging but I'm sure lots of people would find a second account to salvage their own missions as a valuable asset)

Secondly, in terms of mineral rates and such. I have a hulk specifically fitted for solo mining in high-sec. I pretty much mine exclusively to supply myself and some friends with ammunition for our missions, the occasional battleship, nothing large-corp scale, just something to do casually while running through homework.
Anyways, my "suggestion" to really improve low-sec ores without completely throwing the game out of whack. Either reduce the refining size or change the size of a unit of ore. Pretty simple but mining twice as much Hemorphite per cycle is about what's necessary to bring it back in line in terms of risk-reward. I don't want to see mineral prices come down, I would love to see tritanium at 3 isk average, pyerite at 8, so on and so forth, making mining valuable again.

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2010.04.06 07:18:00 - [584]
 

Originally by: Demosai
... stealing salvage from mission runners. Can't do anything about it cause well, it's not punishable in any way...

They can't steal 'your' salvage as that is in your cargohold AFTER you salvaged a wreck. Wrecks floating in space are not 'yours'. This is an intended game mechanic (from when it was first introduced).
EVE's designers has always been very firm about preferably not restricting player interaction, INCLUDING allowing players to enter where other people do their missions (in other words, no 'private' areas).

Per CCP Mitnal:
Originally by: CCP Mitnal
"Our policy on this is extremely clear... Salvaging is a mini-profession within EVE and does not constitute stealing."

Per GM Faolchu :
Originally by: GM Faolchu
Salvaging other peoples wrecks.... This is an intended game mechanic and is in no way an exploit. People salvaging your missions npcs or the player you just blew up are doing nothing wrong. The players are salvaging what is effectively floating rubbish in space and Concord places no value on this wreckage.
Eve is a harsh place you won't always have everything go your way, its a do or die world and people do what they can to get along. If salvaging some wreckage gets them a few more ISK someone will do it, it doesn't matter who just blew it up.

Per Senior GM Ytterbium :
Originally by: GM Ytterbium
Players are still completely free to salvage other pilot wrecks at will ... and doing so is not considered as an exploit.

Per CCP Prism X :
Originally by: CCP Prism X
Why is stealing salvage OK? It's not. It shouldn't even be possible to move an item from your cargo-hold / hanger to another persons cargo-hold / hanger without opening a trade window. Before the salvage enters those containers it is not considered your stuff by the server code. Hence it's not stealing.

Per CCP Incognito :
Originally by: CCP Incognito
Had a chat with some designers this evening.
Ninja salvaging is intended game play. It was always intended that the wrecks are public, the loot is private.
They do not see it as a problem if others salvage your wrecks.

(These quotes are kept handy for your convenience at Ironfleet.com.)

Trabber Shir
Caldari
5I Incorporated
Posted - 2010.04.06 08:02:00 - [585]
 

I only skimmed the last 20 pages so I may have missed where this question was answered, but I am confused by something here (my confusion was reinforced by Chribba's post at the very beginning of the thread).

How does adjusting the insurance payout on ships that cannot dock affect anything? I thought that they couldn't actually be insured since they can't enter station to use the insurance service. Did I miss something?

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2010.04.06 08:19:00 - [586]
 

Edited by: Venkul Mul on 06/04/2010 08:25:24
Originally by: Red Raider
Originally by: Venkul Mul

Originally by: Red Raider
Originally by: Venkul Mul

You know some T1 module or ship that has morphite in its BPO?



If I do what do I get?

Prototype Cloaking Device


Good find. So 2% of all morphite come from reprocessing Prototype Cloaking Devices?
And can you give us a link to the NPC that is dropping them?


I found what you requested though by luck because I just happened to be looking at it already. I have no idea if it drops because I don't pay attention to the loot, most of the time I don't loot missions at all and I thought it was 1% not 2% which due to CCP's method of rounding would mean if even one dropped a day and got repro'd it would be 1% per day. I don't recall it ever dropping in my experience though but I have also never looted a Gisti X Type shield booster either.


You are really speaking of stuff you don't know. It is 1% (you are right in that) of all morphite produced in game, but there is nor rounding error:
|| Morphite || 77% || 1% || 22% || total 100%

CCP here has probably rounded the values normally, so morphite from reprocessing was at least 0.51% of all the morphite produced.



1 or even 100 prototype cloak (BTW they are produced by players from BPO, no NPC drop them) won't cover even 0,01% of all the morphite traded in a day. and as they are produced by players morphite from reprocessing come only from player build items.

Originally by: Trabber Shir
I only skimmed the last 20 pages so I may have missed where this question was answered, but I am confused by something here (my confusion was reinforced by Chribba's post at the very beginning of the thread).

How does adjusting the insurance payout on ships that cannot dock affect anything? I thought that they couldn't actually be insured since they can't enter station to use the insurance service. Did I miss something?


They get basic insurance for free like any other ship.



Space Wanderer
Posted - 2010.04.06 09:16:00 - [587]
 

Edited by: Space Wanderer on 06/04/2010 09:22:52

General comment: Glad to see you guys are looking into those issues.

Some feedback about insurance: Removing insurance premium at first sounded like heresy, but I have to admit that it might not be that bad, even though the argument of "preparing for battle" given in this same thread seems rather interesting. Another concern is that it may remove a (significant?) isk sink.

However, no matter what way is chosen for premium, it is my opinion that death should hurt, so you should never get back 100% of the ship value. I suppose that a 90% is fine for the T1 frigs/dessy/cruisers (the noob ships), to help noobs get back faster. Already BC or at least T1 BS should pay no more than 70-80% their value (people should carry around big guns only when they mean business). T2 and T3 should be returned no more than 50% of their value, or even less (see BS case, only more).

On capitals, ANY capital, I am pretty draconian and think that there should be no insurance on them at all. While encouraging to blow stuff up is good, and helping people to recovery from losses helps that process, if you are unable to recover from a cap loss you shouldn't be flying one in the first place. And if you managed to get into one there's no way you don't know EVE's #1 rule "don't fly what you can't afford to lose". Cap ships are not a single player's asset, they are corp/alliance strategic assets, and there should be no financial mercy on corps/alliances losing their strategic assets.

Zendoren
Aktaeon Industries
The Black Armada
Posted - 2010.04.06 13:23:00 - [588]
 

Edited by: Zendoren on 06/04/2010 13:30:31
Originally by: Rumtum Digger
I haven't read all 20 pages of this forum, so apolo if this has been tabled before.

How will the Scrapmetal skill be affected by the change in reprocessed loot?


It will not be affected, all that is happening that ccp will be making scrap and tags drop mere frequently.

Also, they might adjust the base yield of compounds so that drone drops will be more lucrative. Scrapmetal skill will still have the same percentages of change to reprocess yield depending on skill level as it does now.

Quote:
On capitals, ANY capital, I am pretty draconian and think that there should be no insurance on them at all. While encouraging to blow stuff up is good, and helping people to recovery from losses helps that process, if you are unable to recover from a cap loss you shouldn't be flying one in the first place. And if you managed to get into one there's no way you don't know EVE's #1 rule "don't fly what you can't afford to lose". Cap ships are not a single player's asset, they are corp/alliance strategic assets, and there should be no financial mercy on corps/alliances losing their strategic assets.


I have to agree, insuring a ship that is about the size of Rhode Island should be a major event. To which I suggest allowing only corporations the ability to insure them. Seeing how these ships are 'Fleet' ships and should never be flown alone (Generally speaking) it only makes since to restrict payouts to only corporations... Discuss..

Salizar Amolkshue
Posted - 2010.04.06 15:51:00 - [589]
 

Originally by: Ira Theos
Minerals should come from mining. Yields from recycling should be minimal.



This is a fantastic idea. You don't have to reduce the Meta 0 drops to stop them from being a source of minerals. You just have to make them not be a source of minerals, or at least a poor one.

If you buy a wrecked car and try to melt it down, you do NOT get the 2000 pounds of steel in a nice puddle ready to be recast into something else. Even if you try to take it apart first, you end up with a huge slag pile of useless crap that you can't do anything with. Alloys don't melt down well, components that are made of multiple metal types make a puddle of useless goo, and plastics + metal = junk. Why is it that you can take 50k units of tritanium, make a few (highly advanced) guns, toss them in the cargo hold, and fly them somewhere, and then get 100% of the raw materials back?

Also, if a gun takes 50k of tritaium to build, and it's final volume is 5% of the volume of the tritatium, a bunch was lost during construction, so you shouldn't be able to get it back! Conservation of mass, basic law of nature.

I have perfect refine skills, and I have bought and refined meta 0 items off and on for 2 years now to sell the minerals, and I still think it's dumb that I can make isk doing it.

TL;DR - nerf module refining, hard. Max refine from modules should be 40% or less. Don't let it be used as a way of transporting minerals, don't let it be used as a source of minerals for mission runners. Still reduce Meta 0 drops though or the market will be so flooded that it will be impossible to manufacture them at all. (Leave Ore and Drone refining alone, I'm only talking about things that are effected by ScrapMetal Reprocessing)

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2010.04.06 16:20:00 - [590]
 

Originally by: Salizar Amolkshue
TL;DR - nerf module refining, hard. Max refine from modules should be 40% or less. Don't let it be used as a way of transporting minerals, don't let it be used as a source of minerals for mission runners. Still reduce Meta 0 drops though or the market will be so flooded that it will be impossible to manufacture them at all. (Leave Ore and Drone refining alone, I'm only talking about things that are effected by ScrapMetal Reprocessing)

I'd personally support that, but IF refining is made less than 100%, Meta-0 drops need to be completely eliminated (not just reduced). The reason being that otherwise anything worth producing wouldn't be competitive with dropped items.

That mineral compression would disappear would also be a benefit. If it because difficult/expensive to transport minerals from empire to 0.0, the 0.0 entities would HAVE to employ and protect miners as part of their empire, not just PvP'ers. It'd mean that people would finally LIVE in 0.0 (again), not just fight there.

Red Raider
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.04.06 16:29:00 - [591]
 

Edited by: Red Raider on 06/04/2010 17:45:12
Originally by: Gunner77
Edited by: Gunner77 on 05/04/2010 22:21:47
Originally by: Red Raider
Originally by: Red Raider
Third, meta 0 production will consume minerals (hopefully) due to the need for meta 0 modules in tech II production. The trick is to reduce insurance as an ISK faucet due to the deflationary effects fraud has on the buying power of ISK.


Right now a ton of minerals are being injected into the economy via meta 0 loot. The MD forum has a post laying out a single module's actions supplying .5% of the trit moved every day. Right now how T2 producers get their meta 0 modules is irrelevant because the consumption is being offset by mission loot at least a little but probably in full and then some. If you reduce meta 0 drop rates to introduce less minerals to the market than T2 production consumes you create a positive demand factor on minerals. Any reduction creates positive demand but what we need is a meaningful reduction which if I was pushing the buttons would be a 90% reduction in ALL meta 0 loot.


Supply and Demand Curves

First, cutting supply does not "create a positive demand factor", it simply shifts the supply line to the left, increasing the equilibrium price.


Yes and no. It doesn't create a positive demand factor for meta 0 modules but it does for minerals because some of the meta 0 modules used in manufacturing of T2 components are coming from mission loot. The demand for meta 0 modules stays the same but an erroneous supply source is removed. As long as it is scaled back enough to be below the needs of demand(which I have stated several times as my premise and is quoted and bolded above) you create a positive demand factor for minerals. I label it as a factor because though it may increase demand the insurance nerf may decrease demand(edited). We don't know what the actual effect on the price will be.


Originally by: Gunner77

Deflation

Second, Insurance does not create deflation. Insurance 'fraud' creates a floor for the mineral prices, keeping items at a higher price than they would otherwise be, if they were at the equilibrium price. Deflation in Eve is caused by increasing supply and isk hoarding.


Again this is arguing semantics. Insurance doesn't create inflation(deflating the buying power of ISK) but ISK faucets do. Not necessarily in the mineral market but as more and more ISK is introduced into the game that isn't countered by ISK sinks it does and insurance was never intended as an ISK faucet.

Originally by: Gunner77
The effect I am most interested in, is how far will the mineral prices fall? With the price floor removed on minerals, will the entire market crash? Everything will be cheaper to build as mineral prices fall. Or, will the simultaneous removal of meta0 loot cut supply enough to keep mineral prices where they are currently at?

TL;DR: Interesting stuff in the market is coming, if the changes go through.


I agree. I can't wait to see if meta 0 loot was supplying enough minerals to significantly impact the market or not or if the demand created by insurance fraud was as much as it is reported to be.

Red Raider
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2010.04.06 16:38:00 - [592]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul


You are really speaking of stuff you don't know. It is 1% (you are right in that) of all morphite produced in game, but there is nor rounding error:
|| Morphite || 77% || 1% || 22% || total 100%

CCP here has probably rounded the values normally, so morphite from reprocessing was at least 0.51% of all the morphite produced.


1 or even 100 prototype cloak (BTW they are produced by players from BPO, no NPC drop them) won't cover even 0,01% of all the morphite traded in a day. and as they are produced by players morphite from reprocessing come only from player build items.




Actually I am speaking about something neither one of us know about. We don't know how they came up with a 1% figure but if I was trying to describe the amounts in whole numbers than any amount below 1% would be listed as 1% even if it was .001% and the other figures adjusted accordingly.

As for whether it drops or not I already said I don't know but you didn't know any BPO for tech I that had morphite in it before I pointed that out and you are now claiming that you know for a fact that those don't drop from rats? You were using the morphite to discredit the CCP numbers but I have proven morphite can drop in a tech 1 module per your request. Either prove it doesn't drop from rats now that I have disproven (with links) your theory or accept the possibility that the numbers are accurate. Without knowing the loot tables I doubt we are going to find out either way.

ViciousCycle
Posted - 2010.04.06 17:13:00 - [593]
 

Not many comments here about suicide gankers and I think there should be [even though this is one of my roles ingame].

I suggest proportional payouts [see below] for any player who loses "too many" ships too fast.

System would have to count the number of ships lost in past 30 days and would reduce payouts from the normal scale as follows:

zero to 10 -- normal payout
10 to 20 losses -- 75% of normal payout
20 to 30 losses -- 50% of normal payout
etc.

when any character has more than 50 ships lost within a 30 day period, he should be refused service at the insurance window until some of his losses have "expired".

Suicide gankers would thus have to recalculate their profit points periodically and adjust their tactics instead of simply hanging in the exit queue at Jita 4/4 and scanning likely industrial ships leaving the station.


Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2010.04.06 17:37:00 - [594]
 

Edited by: Kerfira on 06/04/2010 17:37:26
Originally by: ViciousCycle
zero to 10 -- normal payout
10 to 20 losses -- 75% of normal payout
20 to 30 losses -- 50% of normal payout
etc.

Problem with that solution is that it discourages taking chances and losing ships even more. The people most hurt will be active 0.0 or low-sec inhabitants who habitually lose a lot of ships...

Gankers would just cycle between characters so they all only did 10 ganks per month. Those characters doesn't need a lot of skills, and you get 3 characters per account.

The current changed insurance will probably put a stop to most suicide ganking. Most gankers these days only do it because it's potential extra income from a ship they were going to insurance fraud anyway (that's why I do it...). Once that is not possible, the amount of suicide ganks will drop drastically.

Anonymous Player
Posted - 2010.04.07 00:15:00 - [595]
 

Originally by: AkJon Ferguson
I second the motion to get rid of insurance. When faced with a hideously broken and misconceived mechanic, removal > modification. Stop bringing european socialist ponzi schemes into my sandbox! If I wanted EZ mode where dying doesn't matter I would play holy crap or whatever it's called.

The game's whole economic model is currently driven by insurance payouts. Fix it and stop bragging on it until you do.

This 'higher payouts for ships that blow up more' idea is just bass ackwards. Stop inserting 'Hello Kitty' game mechanics into what should be internal corporate/alliance policy.


I have to say, as much as it shocked me, I do agree with your point on about internal corporate/alliance policy. Alliances should have their own ship replacement programs, which inherently aid the high-risk pilots who preform necessary roles.

Anonymous Player
Posted - 2010.04.07 01:07:00 - [596]
 

As a side note, Kerfira, please stop talking about all the WHINGING you think you are hearing. If you play the game half as bad as you type, you are probably a 50k SP pilot who hasn't figured out how to train skills. FFS, it takes less than a second to realize you've made a mistake in spelling, and another split second to correct it. Please do this, or I will be glad to point you to WoW and Hello Kitty where the children with your level of English/grammar skills are playing games.

Mortimer Civeri
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2010.04.07 03:36:00 - [597]
 

Originally by: Erovicious
Originally by: Kerfira
Edited by: Kerfira on 05/04/2010 17:27:29
Mistake spotted and marked in red! You probably didn't align either, didn't tank, and didn't pay attention!
Instead, you sacrificed safety for gain, i.e. KNOWINGLY ran a risk, and then effed up! Laughing

COMPLETELY your own fault! You KNOW what the rules of the game are, and still you expect it to somehow be different for you Rolling Eyes

If think a 'GB2WOW' is in place here, or maybe a 'Hello Kitty Online is that way -->' since you don't seem to grasp that this is a game where YOU and YOU ALONE are responsible for your security, and for what happens when you don't do it!
Originally by: CCP Wrangler
EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.

Have a nice day, and hope you get blown up again next time you do the same stunt Twisted Evil


So much idiocy in such little space, I'm not even sure where to start. Clearly I can align and be ready to react to every neutral that enters an Empire system. Clearly I can tank a ship that has no CPU to fit one (and wouldn't matter anyways with the DPS suicide fits provide for). Rolling Eyes

The morons you think you're fit to speak to are elsewhere. I know what this game is and I know its risks. The game is designed with the 'cold dark lawless lands' of Nullsec to be the dangerous place to live. Pull your nose out of your Hello Kitty references and think a bit bigger than your next insult. When it is safer to mine where there is no law, then a basic part of the game is broken.

Grab a copy of EFT and fit a Mack(cuz god knows you've probably never sat in one) and let me know just how well you can 'tank' a Mack against a suicide ganker then maybe we'll have a more intelligent discourse.


I agree, there is so much stupidity, yet it is in your post. You are the one who didn't take even the basic precautions in game. You didn't align, you didn't warp out when any (combat)ship got close to you, and you got what you deserved. What did you think he was going to do? Invite you for tea and biscuits?

To the idiots whining about payouts if Concord kills you. HTFU, and listen up carebear. The 'insurance' following the market will nerf suicide ganking, just not to where 'you' like it, and is going to work 'as intended' by CCP.

To all the thick skulls who think EVE 'insurance' is like RL insurance. Here is a hint; (IT IS NOT)

It is however a subsidy, to get you thick skulls banging each others heads in.Rolling Eyes The 'subsidy' has been based on ancient FIXED market data, before Drone poo and various other market forces were even introduced into the game.

As it is now this 'subsidy' covers more than just the "basic hull" costs, and is out of line with the market as it is today. This makes suicide ganking, dare I say it, profitable? As meta 1-2 items are, most of the time, cheaper than meta 0, it becomes ridiculously cheap to put together a suicide fit. Most gankers, will maybe only lose 10-15 mil with a battleship fit, which is a pittance. Now when this goes live, they will lose more 'as intended', not as 'you intend'.

Thrasymachus TheSophist
Posted - 2010.04.07 05:00:00 - [598]
 

Originally by: Anonymous Player
As a side note, Kerfira, please stop talking about all the WHINGING you think you are hearing. If you play the game half as bad as you type, you are probably a 50k SP pilot who hasn't figured out how to train skills. FFS, it takes less than a second to realize you've made a mistake in spelling, and another split second to correct it. Please do this, or I will be glad to point you to WoW and Hello Kitty where the children with your level of English/grammar skills are playing games.


Pro-tip: Before ripping someone for purportedly misspelling, you should check a dictionary.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whinge

Just saying ... Wink

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2010.04.07 05:33:00 - [599]
 

Originally by: Red Raider
Originally by: Venkul Mul


You are really speaking of stuff you don't know. It is 1% (you are right in that) of all morphite produced in game, but there is nor rounding error:
|| Morphite || 77% || 1% || 22% || total 100%

CCP here has probably rounded the values normally, so morphite from reprocessing was at least 0.51% of all the morphite produced.


1 or even 100 prototype cloak (BTW they are produced by players from BPO, no NPC drop them) won't cover even 0,01% of all the morphite traded in a day. and as they are produced by players morphite from reprocessing come only from player build items.




Actually I am speaking about something neither one of us know about. We don't know how they came up with a 1% figure but if I was trying to describe the amounts in whole numbers than any amount below 1% would be listed as 1% even if it was .001% and the other figures adjusted accordingly.

As for whether it drops or not I already said I don't know (Q.E.D. that was the stuff you didn't know) but you didn't know any BPO for tech I that had morphite in it before I pointed that out and you are now claiming that you know for a fact that those don't drop from rats? You were using the morphite to discredit the CCP numbers but I have proven morphite can drop in a tech 1 module per your request. Either prove it doesn't drop from rats now that I have disproven (with links) your theory or accept the possibility that the numbers are accurate. Without knowing the loot tables I doubt we are going to find out either way.


The prototype cloak BPO originally was seeded in an event even before I started playing. If it is currently sold by some NPC corp it is one of the lesser one. I didn't considered it as it is not drop by NPC ships in any of the normal missions. For all I know only a broken [and probably non recyclable] cloak is dropped in on of the Cosmos missions, nothing you can farm.

What I know for sure is that at the time when that table was created I had a friend buying and recycling EOS a the gain from selling the component pieces was higher than the sell price of the EOS (the data were taken at the height of the ferrogel scam). She did that to at least 20 EOS during the period and I am sure she was not the only player doing that. That is where the mprphite is coming from.

So yes, that table, as it was done, is full of holes. "Loot" include all the mineral compression module and recycled ships, included T2 ships.

From the silence from the Dev and the few information available it is probable that CCP has never tried to get a real picture of the situation, clearing away the spurious data.

Changing several fundamental mechanics on imprecise data is very dangerous.

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2010.04.07 07:46:00 - [600]
 

Originally by: Thrasymachus TheSophist
Originally by: Anonymous Player
As a side note, Kerfira, please stop talking about all the WHINGING you think you are hearing. If you play the game half as bad as you type, you are probably a 50k SP pilot who hasn't figured out how to train skills. FFS, it takes less than a second to realize you've made a mistake in spelling, and another split second to correct it. Please do this, or I will be glad to point you to WoW and Hello Kitty where the children with your level of English/grammar skills are playing games.

Pro-tip: Before ripping someone for purportedly misspelling, you should check a dictionary.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/whinge

Just saying ... Wink

Beuh... Took away my chance of ripping into the little kiddie grammar-**** Laughing


Pages: first : previous : ... 16 17 18 19 [20] 21 22 23 24 : last (24)

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