open All Channels
seplocked Market Discussions
blankseplocked Guidance Systems - The madness
 
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 (10)

Author Topic

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.07.08 21:14:00 - [91]
 

note: the profits generated from the extra step of converting (sellable) p2s into guidance systems should be looked at seperately, ignoring that step and focusing only on very beginning to very end is wrong

for example, under ebank accounting, if you mined the minerals yourself and then made a battleship that sells for less than you could sell the minerals, making that battleship was profitable

of course, it wasn't: the mining was profitable, making the battleship was a loss

SencneS is trying to use the profit generated by making the p2 components to cover up the important thing: that making guidance systems is a loss ergo nobody will do it

to put his argument in perspective, he would argue that if I work all day and make $200, and then light a cigar with a hundred dollar bill, I made $100 by lighting the cigar with the hundred dollar bill, not lost $100

Priscilla Fancypants
Posted - 2010.07.08 21:14:00 - [92]
 

Originally by: Weaselior
Originally by: SencneS
Edited by: SencneS on 08/07/2010 16:17:07
Originally by: mechtech
This is the single stupidest MD post I have ever read, I hope to god you're drunk.


What, proper time calculation for any given function too much for you to understand or something?

It's pretty simple, this function would get me 600mil per month, how many hours would it take me to get that 600mil? 720. So per hour it's 835K. How many hours does it take for me to maintain that, 30 hours. 835,000*30 = 25.05mil.

Why you don't understand this is clear but why you choose to call it stupid is... meh whatever makes you feel more secure I guess.


here's a fun calculation to make:

value of guidance systems manufactured per hour, minus value of p2 components used per hour

that's your profit per hour for making guidance systems

what is it

RAW23
Posted - 2010.07.08 21:17:00 - [93]
 

Edited by: RAW23 on 08/07/2010 21:22:13
Edited by: RAW23 on 08/07/2010 21:21:44
Originally by: SencneS

835,000*30 = 25.05mil.

Why you don't understand this is clear but why you choose to call it stupid is... meh whatever makes you feel more secure I guess.


I can't for the life of me work out why you are multiplying these two numbers together. One represents your total (active and passive)monthly earnings presented in an isk per hour form. The other is your number of active hours (although since you said in an earlier post that this was 1 hour every 2 days, shouldn't that figure be 15 rather than 30?). Why are they together? Please explain slowly so I can follow what you think you are doing here.

edit
Originally by: weaselior

SencneS is trying to use the profit generated by making the p2 components to cover up the important thing: that making guidance systems is a loss ergo nobody will do it


This isn't quite true. People do still make ships when they are effectively losing money by adding in a production stage when they should just be selling their raw minerals. And it is plausible that quite a few people will approach PI just in terms of looking at what they can get for their final product, without looking at whether intermediate stages add or subtract value. The real question is, will enough people do this to have an effect on prices? If lots of non-trader types who abhor spreadsheets get involved in PI, as CCP seems to be hoping, the answer may well be yes.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.07.08 21:19:00 - [94]
 

Originally by: pmchem
If only you knew how to properly value assets, ebank may be solvent. Anyone doing PI should use Wyke's sheet (or their own) instead. Link again:
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0Ar_YTOcXpvb9dGFIdHJlb0VmYXBORWRrcXFkeHNjcWc&hl=en_GB#gid=10

I mean, sencnes thinks he can melt down T2 drones and get robotics and GS from them:
Quote:
Personally I look forward to that day, because market lag happen and is still happening and I'm having a BLAST melting down T2 mods and drones that are selling cheaper then what I sell to Jita buy order the materials I get form melting them. EASY M-O-N-E-Y!


Quote:
I've even melted down some T2 drones because of Robotics being priced enough to make that profitable"


You really, really do not want to base investment or production on his advice.


lawl does SencneS know literally anything about eve at all

Vilgan Mazran
Aperture Harmonics
K162
Posted - 2010.07.08 21:57:00 - [95]
 

Edited by: Vilgan Mazran on 08/07/2010 21:58:14
Doesn't seem that hard.

4 BIF is best case for high sec. lets throw 2 AIFs in there as well.

10 P2/hour/planet or 50 P2/hour/char
aka 7.5 P3/hour/char (treating AIF to make the P3 from p2 as free)

Assuming P3 at 20k, that is 150k/hour/character. Or 108 mil per month per character assuming they are willing to double click extractors every single bloody day to make it. Not to mention hauling to make the P2/P3 and then hauling to get it to jita.

I don't see how you can possibly suggest GS hitting 20k is a dream. 108/month is like the worst possible income in eve. Even macros wouldn't touch that with a 10 foot pole considering that is makeable in 2-4 days macro mining or in 4-6 hours macro ratting.

Sure you can make more in 0.0 or w-space, but you can also make a ton more isk in those places too. 200mil isk is 3 hours of 0.0 anoms or 1 hour of sleepers in w-space.

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.07.08 22:03:00 - [96]
 

Originally by: RAW23

This isn't quite true. People do still make ships when they are effectively losing money by adding in a production stage when they should just be selling their raw minerals. And it is plausible that quite a few people will approach PI just in terms of looking at what they can get for their final product, without looking at whether intermediate stages add or subtract value. The real question is, will enough people do this to have an effect on prices? If lots of non-trader types who abhor spreadsheets get involved in PI, as CCP seems to be hoping, the answer may well be yes.


Yeah, but there the margin lost is pretty small and easy to miss without spreadsheeting it out. With this, you're losing something like half your money: you don't need a spreadsheet to pick up on that.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2010.07.08 22:04:00 - [97]
 

Originally by: RAW23

I can't for the life of me work out why you are multiplying these two numbers together. One represents your total (active and passive)monthly earnings presented in an isk per hour form. The other is your number of active hours (although since you said in an earlier post that this was 1 hour every 2 days, shouldn't that figure be 15 rather than 30?). Why are they together? Please explain slowly so I can follow what you think you are doing here.


Yeah but 30 hours seems more realistic anyway. But that's still pretty reasonable profit for the effort. If you 1 hour a day, that includes all the extractor cycles you have to start, and once every couple of days doing a little logistics. Which is why it's probably best to go with a 5 Planet setup explained above. Have four planets pump out the P1 items. On the 5th planet convert them to P2 and P3.

I guess it's just personal preference on how I judge value of time for production job. I actually can't think of any other way to value time of production jobs.

Amount made over a given time frame / the given time frame = Value of time.
Value of time * active hours doing that = The cost of the amount made over.

We're talking about something that kinda runs itself with very little startup cost and no ISK cost after setup apart from import/export. Which over a month you'd be unlucky if that was more then a couple of mil.

Why? How would you value your time for PI?

Janice Polito
Tech 3 Hotsauce Limited
Posted - 2010.07.08 22:18:00 - [98]
 

Originally by: SencneS



You've got looking at things from the wrong direction down to a science.

WahWahWeeWoo
Posted - 2010.07.08 22:42:00 - [99]
 

So clearly... from the numbers I've read here from goons, guidance systems are stocked in huge quantities. Which means their liquidity of value is questionable at best. I think I'm going to start selling 70% of my stock(5m) at +10% market simply because I'll have more liquid isk to multiply on larger margins. Opportunity costs + deflation caused by all this speculation is ripening other avenues.

Suicida1
Posted - 2010.07.08 22:49:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: SencneS

Why? How would you value your time for PI?


Time_spent_talking_about_PI + time_spent_spinning_plannet + time_spent_hauling + time_spent_adjusting_orders + time_spent_clicking * disgust_from_realising_that_you_are_wasting_your_game_time_doing_sometning_pathetic +
opportunity_cost_of_not_being_able_ to_go_somewhere_else_because_i_have_to_stick_around_to_haul_stuff

..which all result in a couple of hundred millions per month that could be done in hours by doing somethin else

something like that :)

Maria Yumeno
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.09 01:09:00 - [101]
 

Originally by: SencneS

Originally by: Maria Yumeno
So basically your spreadsheet is setup for 2 planets? Then is multiplied by four at the end?


Not quiet, all 4 planets could produce GS's but they are paired planets. Plasma and Storm. Each planet produces one half of chain. Technically you could probably get away with using all 5 planets, Have Two Storm planets just producing Water-Cooled CPU's, Two Plasma just producing just Transmitters. Then have the 5th running the two together. But there really no need to do that as all four planets can be producing them.

The launch pad can only hold about 7 days of P2 items and leave enough room for incoming production, and Finished goods. So your touch/face time is run the small amount of extractors and once a week move some P2s. If you think outside the box a little there is a trick which I recently was shown that makes this very much more obtainable.

It's not a complex setup or requires very much logistics involved. It's just unconventional, which is why some people don't understand it.

EDIT:- Actually come to think of it, it's probably best to have maximum capacity and build GS's on the 5 planet.

Have 2 Plasma's and 2 Storms producing their 2 each P2 items. This will allow you to really build up an inventory, run it for a week then go to each one, pick up the P2 items then dump em on the 5th planet for turning into GS's.

This also has a better effect of the "stop gap" production just in case the P2 are selling better.


What i meant was your spreadsheet seemed to be showing around 23 extractors + an unknown amount of factories being worth 150m. Then you multiplied by 4x planets.

You changed your calculations around now and so it looks a little more realistic, although still, a harvest rate of 5100 per hour seems a little optimistic. i have found very few planets where i can extract more than 2300 every 30mins, although it is possible. Also remember your p1 factories will be chewing through 6000 units per hour so the ratio of extractors to basic factories will be close to 1-1.

The physical set-up of your planets shouldn't matter too much, so long as your numbers are correct. How u setup your planets will just change the amount of logistics that you need to do.
I agree that it is best to do as much as possible on a single planet.

Kane Portnoy
Posted - 2010.07.09 07:54:00 - [102]
 

what is about the transmitter prices?
seemed that they rise also a bit? dunno the math, but i think they have to increase like guidance systems? as they are need for them?

Dr Nefarius
Posted - 2010.07.09 08:51:00 - [103]
 

Originally by: Kane Portnoy
what is about the transmitter prices?
seemed that they rise also a bit? dunno the math, but i think they have to increase like guidance systems? as they are need for them?


They are not likely to be in for a major readjustment up because of the increasing GS prices. You don't use transmitters to manufacure GS. Why? Becuase you do not manufacure GS with it's current market value.

The value of transmitters is currently set from it's role as a t2 component, and as a component in other P3:s(Hazmat Detection Systems, High-Tech Transmitter) that are worth a lot more then GS.

That said, it's not impossible for it to rise as with many other P2:s, but it doesn't seem to be anything special about it.

Wyke Mossari
Gallente
Posted - 2010.07.09 11:17:00 - [104]
 

Originally by: RAW23


Originally by: weaselior

SencneS is trying to use the profit generated by making the p2 components to cover up the important thing: that making guidance systems is a loss ergo nobody will do it


This isn't quite true. People do still make ships when they are effectively losing money by adding in a production stage when they should just be selling their raw minerals. And it is plausible that quite a few people will approach PI just in terms of looking at what they can get for their final product, without looking at whether intermediate stages add or subtract value. The real question is, will enough people do this to have an effect on prices? If lots of non-trader types who abhor spreadsheets get involved in PI, as CCP seems to be hoping, the answer may well be yes.


This is a very valid point, and judging from the amount of P0 traded, quite a lot of PI producers just haven't run any numbers. That was one of my main motivations for making my spreadsheet public, the insanity was driving me up the wall.

RAW23
Posted - 2010.07.09 11:25:00 - [105]
 

Edited by: RAW23 on 09/07/2010 16:42:12
Edited by: RAW23 on 09/07/2010 11:27:52
Edited by: RAW23 on 09/07/2010 11:26:41
Originally by: SencneS


I guess it's just personal preference on how I judge value of time for production job. I actually can't think of any other way to value time of production jobs.

[A]Amount made over a given time frame / the given time frame = Value of time.
[B]Value of time * active hours doing that = The cost of the amount made over.




The big problem here is that value of time (t1) in equation A is not really the same value as value of time (t2) in equation B. Either would be fine by itself to give you a certain value but mixing them together gives some very strange results.

Lets assume that your formula is correct. Then let's look at two further hypothetical examples. In example 1 the 600mil only takes 1 active hour per month. In example 2 the 600mil takes 100 active hours. Now, according to your formula, if it only takes 1 active hour to make the 600mil, then the cost of your time = 890k. If it takes 100 hours, though, you get the result that the cost of your time is 89mil! This clearly makes no sense, as your formula seems to suggest that the more you make per hour of activity, the less valuable your time is!


Quote:


Why? How would you value your time for PI?


Isk made / active hours. So, in this case simply 600/30 = 20mil/hour. Very, very simple. Passive time is really a red herring.

Edited to correct the typo picked up by SencneS below.

Tolis Irithel
Northstar Cabal
R.A.G.E
Posted - 2010.07.09 11:39:00 - [106]
 

Edited by: Tolis Irithel on 09/07/2010 11:39:07
Quote:
Isk made / active hours.

Quote:
Amount made over a given time frame / the given time frame = Value of time.


Different people have cited this as a method of assessing "value of time". This isn't correct - what this is valuing is "ISK generated over active time", or active hourly revenue.

The correct "value of time" should be MAX(potential ISK made/active hours), out of your set of available ISK-generating activities. How you define active hours will also affect this calculation, as if you're doing something else at the same time, you'll need to compare pairs of activities to accurately value time (on the assumption that you can mission/mine/haul/whatever while running PI on same character with minimal efficiency loss.)

This provides the most useful comparison, in that it allows you to tell whether adding PI to a portfolio of activities provides a higher MAX(potential ISK made/active hours) value than leaving it out.

RAW23
Posted - 2010.07.09 11:51:00 - [107]
 

Edited by: RAW23 on 09/07/2010 11:51:37
Originally by: Tolis Irithel
Edited by: Tolis Irithel on 09/07/2010 11:39:07
Quote:
Isk made / active hours.

Quote:
Amount made over a given time frame / the given time frame = Value of time.


Different people have cited this as a method of assessing "value of time". This isn't correct - what this is valuing is "ISK generated over active time", or active hourly revenue.

The correct "value of time" should be MAX(potential ISK made/active hours), out of your set of available ISK-generating activities. How you define active hours will also affect this calculation, as if you're doing something else at the same time, you'll need to compare pairs of activities to accurately value time (on the assumption that you can mission/mine/haul/whatever while running PI on same character with minimal efficiency loss.)

This provides the most useful comparison, in that it allows you to tell whether adding PI to a portfolio of activities provides a higher MAX(potential ISK made/active hours) value than leaving it out.


Fair enough but you are talking about an absolute(ish) value of time, here, rather than the value of my time as I currently spend it. Your value will be a theoretical value that will apply to all players with identical skillsets and resource bases rather than a measurement of actual hourly earnings. Of course, for comparative purposes each person should compare the actual to the theoretical potential value to determine whether what they are actually doing is the best thing for them to do. But I wouldn't go so far as to say the one value is the "correct value" of time, whilst the other is not. If I work in a shop for 10 pounds an hour, I could certainly tell myself that my time is worth more than this. But I can equally legitimately say that my time is worth exactly what I in fact get in exchange for it.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2010.07.09 14:28:00 - [108]
 

Edited by: SencneS on 09/07/2010 14:31:19
Originally by: RAW23
Lets assume that your formula is correct. Then let's look at two further hypothetical examples. In example 1 the 600mil only takes 1 active hour per month. In example 2 the 600mil takes 100 active hours. Now, according to your formula, if it only takes 1 active hour to make the 600mil, then the cost of your time = 890k. If it takes 100 hours, though, you get the result that the cost of your time is 890mil! This clearly makes no sense, as your formula seems to suggest that the more you make per hour of activity, the less valuable your time is!


First off you're a little off on your calculation.

Using your numbers = 1hour = 890K , 100 * 890,000 = 89,000,000 ISK (89mil) not 890mil.

Here is how I'd do it if it was 100hours of PI.
600mil / 720 = 833,000 ISK per hour

833,000 * 100 = 83,300,000 ISK (83.3mil)

This makes it IMPOSSIBLE for me to have more active time value then the actual ISK I've earned in the same time frame. If I only earned 10mil in 720 hours the formula would be.

10mil / 720 = 13,888.89 ISK per hour.
If in a month I used 100 hours,
13,888.89 * 100 = 1,388,889 ISK You see :)
Even if it took all 720 hours.
13,888,98 * 720 = 10,000,000.90

Which is how I calculate mining as it's 100% face time/active time Any ISK I near has a extremely low ISK/hour ratio.

Secondly if at any point my face time was actually more then the time it took to perform that function for example.... I actually can't think of any because if I'm activing doing it, it's included in the formula to start with. But lets assume something like actual login time.

Mining for example 10 mil a day would be

10,000,000 / 24 = 416,666.67 isk an hour

However I sat afk out at a belt not mining staring at the screen for 48 hours.

416,666.67 * 48 = 20,000,000.16 ISK face time cost.

Then why would I be doing it in the first place if it cost more "face time" then actual profit? I wouldn't I wouldn't sit there pretending to mine for 48 hours and only turn on the lasers for 23 lol If I did that's a complete waste of time and I deserve to record the loss.

But like I said, actually doing this would never happen. Besides I consider falling asleep at the screen -NON-Face time :)

Ilarra
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2010.07.09 15:09:00 - [109]
 

Edited by: Ilarra on 09/07/2010 15:11:28
Originally by: SencneS
Edited by: SencneS on 09/07/2010 14:31:19
Originally by: RAW23
Lets assume that your formula is correct. Then let's look at two further hypothetical examples. In example 1 the 600mil only takes 1 active hour per month. In example 2 the 600mil takes 100 active hours. Now, according to your formula, if it only takes 1 active hour to make the 600mil, then the cost of your time = 890k. If it takes 100 hours, though, you get the result that the cost of your time is 890mil! This clearly makes no sense, as your formula seems to suggest that the more you make per hour of activity, the less valuable your time is!


First off you're a little off on your calculation.

Using your numbers = 1hour = 890K , 100 * 890,000 = 89,000,000 ISK (89mil) not 890mil.

Here is how I'd do it if it was 100hours of PI.
600mil / 720 = 833,000 ISK per hour

833,000 * 100 = 83,300,000 ISK (83.3mil)

This makes it IMPOSSIBLE for me to have more active time value then the actual ISK I've earned in the same time frame. If I only earned 10mil in 720 hours the formula would be.

10mil / 720 = 13,888.89 ISK per hour.
If in a month I used 100 hours,
13,888.89 * 100 = 1,388,889 ISK You see :)
Even if it took all 720 hours.
13,888,98 * 720 = 10,000,000.90

Which is how I calculate mining as it's 100% face time/active time Any ISK I near has a extremely low ISK/hour ratio.

Secondly if at any point my face time was actually more then the time it took to perform that function for example.... I actually can't think of any because if I'm activing doing it, it's included in the formula to start with. But lets assume something like actual login time.

Mining for example 10 mil a day would be

10,000,000 / 24 = 416,666.67 isk an hour

However I sat afk out at a belt not mining staring at the screen for 48 hours.

416,666.67 * 48 = 20,000,000.16 ISK face time cost.

Then why would I be doing it in the first place if it cost more "face time" then actual profit? I wouldn't I wouldn't sit there pretending to mine for 48 hours and only turn on the lasers for 23 lol If I did that's a complete waste of time and I deserve to record the loss.

But like I said, actually doing this would never happen. Besides I consider falling asleep at the screen -NON-Face time :)


You are measuring the value of your time by the amount of passive income you are earning due to PI, when in reality, the passive income (the 720 hours in a month) is meaningless because it requires active work. That is the equivalent of me measuring the time value of an activity against the value of the datacores my research alts are earning in the time it takes me to perform the activity.

You should measure the value of your active time against other activities you could be doing in the same active time, such as missioning or mining. If you earn more from 10 active hours of PI than you do from 10 active hours of missioning/ratting/exploration/playing the market/mining, then maybe that's something (hint: you don't). Measuring your time against your passive income per month is a meaningless number, though.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2010.07.09 15:30:00 - [110]
 

I guess I don't understand what part of "This is how I personally measure my value time per activity" people are not understanding...
Is this not personal preference how I choose to value my time? Here is my time valuation in a nutshell.. Any activity I perform get this calculation...

Value of ISK / Amount of "real time" it took to get that ISK = value of ISK per hour.

Active time actually doing the functions require to make that ISK * Value of ISK per hour = My time cost.

I do this for every function.

PI would have it's own value.
Mining has it's own value.
Missioning has it's own value.
Manufacturing has it's own value, this is where this idea comes from. I only spend 5 minutes buying the materials, 30 minutes hauling it, 5 minutes installing the one week long jobs. In the end my profit can be say 350mil. So my per hour is about 2mil, that's how much my time cost me. So my profit is really 348mil.
Marketing has a value but that's harder to gage so I put it at 5mil per hour, otherwise I'm performing an CRAP LOAD of calculations.

This allows me to pretty much determine how and where I should spend my time if I don't feel like doing one thing. Lets say all my slots are used up. But I feel like playing the game for another hour... What do I do? Marketing, missioning, mining... I'll do Missioning because my market is up to date..

Why I'm getting lectured on how to personally value my time is astonishing...

mental maverick
Percussive Diplomacy
Posted - 2010.07.09 16:12:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: SencneS
Why I'm getting lectured on how to personally value my time is astonishing...


Because you are using it as argument in a discussion about the profitability of PI and whether it is a viable income source compared to other proffessions, based on ACTIVE time spent setting it up and maintaining it.

You don't see me using some ****ed up argument about my time spent pvping and calculating profitability on that. Then using some formula based on that and my personal preference of pvping in an attempt to estimate the tendency of ppl doing PI or not at current product value.

I really, REALLY, hope you are trolling because the level of stupidity in your posts and the amount of posting is starting to resemble the forum version of a bad case of diarrhea.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2010.07.09 16:19:00 - [112]
 

Originally by: mental maverick
Because you are using it as argument in a discussion about the profitability of PI and whether it is a viable income source compared to other proffessions, based on ACTIVE time spent setting it up and maintaining it.


err no, someone proclaimed I value my time as "free" I mealy said no it has cost, and this is how it costs..

So nice try but you're wrong. It wasn't used in any way about profitability of PI. It's was mentioned because someone said my time was free..

Dr Oktober
Analogue Limited Engineering
Posted - 2010.07.09 16:31:00 - [113]
 

So in other words, yes you did use it an argument.


SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2010.07.09 16:44:00 - [114]
 

Edited by: SencneS on 09/07/2010 16:50:17
Originally by: Dr Oktober
So in other words, yes you did use it an argument.


EDIT:- Actually nice try there too.. I didn't see that until just now "an argument" the answer is "yes, I used this an an argument, about how I value my time personally, not about how PI is valued."

That would only be correct if I had said - "Everyone should be using this forumla to calculate their PI profitability." Which I have never said. And I wouldn't be so stupid as to say "Everyone is valuing their time in PI." Because I know some people value their time as "Free".

What you and others are apprently trying to do is shove words into my mouth, in which I will happy point to the fact that the whole time I'm saying "If I wanted to..." or "Here is how I would personally...". Which is something you and the few posters above are missing..

The PI Profitability is just that, PI Profitability before the "Value of time" is even included, why? Because everyone values their own personal time differently. What they personally have to determine is --> IF <-- they where looking at PI, what is the BASE (Which I've given) and then take out their very own time cost..

So you can stop trying to shove words into my mouth they don't fit.

RAW23
Posted - 2010.07.09 16:52:00 - [115]
 

Edited by: RAW23 on 09/07/2010 16:52:50
Edited my previous post to correct the typo.

But, that aside, your formula still has it that the cost of your time is lower the more you make per active hour.

As to it being a personal approach, that doesn't protect it from charges of not making sense. People are just pointing out to you that if you choose to value your time in this way then you choose to value your time irrationally.

Dr Oktober
Analogue Limited Engineering
Posted - 2010.07.09 16:55:00 - [116]
 

Me? first time I've posted in this thread an I'm not trying to shove anything in anyone's mouth.

Just saying that your statement of not using the argument of your price/time is patently false. You did use it in an argument, in your own defence.

SencneS
Rebellion Against Big Irreversible Dinks
Posted - 2010.07.09 17:05:00 - [117]
 

Originally by: RAW23
But, that aside, your formula still has it that the cost of your time is lower the more you make per active hour.

As to it being a personal approach, that doesn't protect it from charges of not making sense. People are just pointing out to you that if you choose to value your time in this way then you choose to value your time irrationally.


I don't consider it irrational, I'm more of a manufacturer at heart.. Where ISK/Hour/Slot is very much an accepted calculation to determine of a BPO's "Value" in production. It certainly helped me determine which missile I should manufacture first when I ran that 200+ item munition business.

Applying that same concept to time for everything else is hardly irrational. Manufactures look at "Overall sale/profit (Depends on who you are) of the manufactured item" / Total time it takes to make = ISK/Hour/Slot. That's how much that BPO is worth per hour in production. So taking that same concept and applying it to "Personal Time" is as valid as any other personal time valuation method.. How you can call it irrational is a bit of a stretch. RAW, Come on dude we know each other better then this..

mental maverick
Percussive Diplomacy
Posted - 2010.07.09 17:30:00 - [118]
 

Originally by: SencneS
So you can stop trying to shove words into my mouth they don't fit.


I don't know about that seeing as it does look more than big enough...

Cba to quote all the stupid stuff you've posted in this, and other threads on the same topic, but it started with you making the statement "20k for GSs, in your dreams!"

At which point it was explained to you that 20k is probably only half way to its true value, with a slight disregard for stockpiles, considering the effort required to produce them.

This is when you post your setup as to how you would do it and the amount of active time required to maintain said setup. Turns out you made about 25 mil per active h according to your estimates, which I thought were a bit optimistic but ok. 25 mil per active h is still not very good compared to other professions in EVE, which was subsequently explained to you.

And que your flawed formula for valuing time, as an argument, in extent, defending your "20k GSs, in your dreams!" statement.

And now I really am getting worried I'm being trolled, cause this is getting quite ridiculous tbh...


RAW23
Posted - 2010.07.09 17:33:00 - [119]
 

Edited by: RAW23 on 09/07/2010 17:33:58
Originally by: SencneS
How you can call it irrational is a bit of a stretch. RAW, Come on dude we know each other better then this..


I've got to be honest, it's because I have been reading and responding to your posts for a while now that I don't hesitate to call some of your views irrational.

That's not to say I don't appreciate some of your posting, especially concerning information about ebank. It's just your reasoning I find consistently problematic.

Darthion Illys
Amarr
Tyrans d'Or
Tyrans d'0r
Posted - 2010.07.09 17:35:00 - [120]
 

Edited by: Darthion Illys on 09/07/2010 17:35:37
Guidance Systems are now up to 14.8k/u, btw.

What that means, is that you -should- have bought it at 7k/u, where/when SencneS said you shouldn't.


Update - Typos and stuff.


Pages: first : previous : 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... : last (10)

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