open All Channels
seplocked Market Discussions
blankseplocked WTH: Neodymium and Thulium: Armageddon Con't
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

Shar Tegral
Posted - 2008.10.28 05:53:00 - [1]
 

I was totally enjoying the market discussing the pros and cons of the upcoming change. While I totally agree that the OP in the original thread was pretty useless I do not think that the the fine conversation, refreshingly cordial & shockingly polite, deserved to be shutdown so abruptly.

So, to continue:
Originally by: Tasko Pal
I see a lot of whining in this thread about the new "alchemy" reactions, but I don't see a lot to whine about. CCP has softened the extremely stiff supply inelasticity for dyspro and prom-based reactions. That's good enough for me. If they're right about cadmium being 20 times as common as dyspro, then that would be in theory a doubling of the possible supply of ferrofluid, ignoring the other uses for both dyspro and cadmium. Good enough again.

I don't mind that cadmium increases in price. That means more moons than now will be worth mining. That's another benefit of the change. Under current dynamics, as demand for dyspro and prom products increases, they crowd out the other moon minerals.
I to see this as an expansion of sorts. Mostly an expansion until a true and valid solution is developed.

There is nothing inherently wrong in putting a stop gap measure in place as long as you are honest about it. From the tone and statements in the blog, I think CCP is honest that this is a poor fix, a small band aid, to a bigger problem. However in their opinion the situation needs some adjustment even if a temporary one.

But I also agree: the law of unintended consequences are going to be, as always, a real kick in the ass.

Mika Meroko
Minmatar
Crayon Posting Inc
Posted - 2008.10.28 05:58:00 - [2]
 

Edited by: Mika Meroko on 28/10/2008 05:58:40
oh, (and I say this half-jokingly)

I bet ya most of the whiners are involved in some way in selling the 2 moon minerals

*wink*

otherwise it wouldnt really affect the rest of us deeply...(since 20x as much.. well, have to do the math for the cost......)

since in the end... the prices will adjust... XD

edit: added half-jokingly

Trading Bunnz
Equatorial Industires
Barely-Legal
Posted - 2008.10.28 06:34:00 - [3]
 

The reality is it all comes down to whether there was/is an artifically generated supply limitation on dysprosium or whether its actually a capacity limitation. If its the first, then no significant changes will occur except to see a slight drop in dysprosium, offset by a solid climb in cadmium. If its the second, then the unintended consequences are going to extreme. I would guess CCP have information on the number of dyspro moons, their status, and whether mined materials are being stockpiled.

Having had another quick look at the dev blog, something stands out that didn't before, and that is that you REFINE the unrefined ferrofluid/dysporite, to turn it into real stuff. This is pretty damn significant and I cant believe I missed it first time through. This means that these operations are perfectly suited to lowsec, rather than to 0.0, and means my projections above need to be reconsidered.

Reaction tower (probably on a cadmium moon), import 16,800 units of hafnium each week, export 33,600 units of unrefined intermediate, take it to station, refine it (skills? efficiency? taxes?), end up with 3,360 units of ferrofluid and 15,960 units of hafnium. Do that on 10 towers, and you replace 0.5 dyspro moons, and 1 simple reaction tower in your chains. Cost prohibitive, making fuel costs alone on the estimate of 60k per unit of ferrofluid, without counting the cost of consumed cadmium and hafnium. With dyspro at the price it is now, cost to make ferrofluid is around what? 40k/u?

So if dysprosium doubles in price from where it is now, its probably going to be viable to do alchemy and start churning cadmium as a replacement. As a change to ease the supply side of dysprosium, its really relying on the stupidity of the market to generate any effect whatsoever.

There is no way that CCP will go live with this change. :)

Chaos Incarnate
Faceless Logistics
Posted - 2008.10.28 06:48:00 - [4]
 

Having mulled it over in my head a bit, I'm somewhat agreeing that it feels like a stopgap measure. There's no significant additional programming required; just write in a few new reactions, add in a few new refineable items, and voila! patchwork dysprosium fix

I'm happy about some changes and the reduction of the bottleneck, but I don't much care for the specifics - it seems the cadmium:dysprosium linkup is unfavorable to gallente tech prices.

Realistically, I would have rather seen some way that the very weak products that are worthless to mine (evaporites and otherwise) could be reacted together via an advanced reaction chain that could produce small amounts of r64s or r64 materials, rather than burdening the cadmium/etc rarity minerals

Verite Rendition
Caldari
F.R.E.E. Explorer
EVE Animal Control
Posted - 2008.10.28 08:17:00 - [5]
 

Edited by: Verite Rendition on 28/10/2008 08:17:21
This is a bit off-topic, but in the last thread I remarked that according to what I know, there should only be 4x as many Cadmium moons are Dys moons in the game(ratio of r64 to r16), not 20x. Niedar has since claimed that this is wrong; yet it disagrees with the guides I've read on the matter. Does anyone know for sure how this works, because I still find 20x being very hard to believe given that all of my moon scan charts enforce the 4x rule.

Tiirae
The 5th Freedom
Wildly Inappropriate.
Posted - 2008.10.28 08:28:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Tiirae on 28/10/2008 08:31:16
I agree that it's probably a bandaid. All they have really achieved is stopping r64 moon owners manipulating the price the ridiculous levels, as it will now be profitable to manufacture them with the new reaction once they reach a certain price.

Of course, there's long lead time on getting quantities this way, a smart operator will build these using the new method continually but only put them on the market when it's profitable to do so. Or maybe, I don't know, I don't do that stuff...

edit: just noticed the lock on the other topic. I think that's a bit out of hand, tinfoil hattery is stupid but not offensive. And there only about 5000 thread with identical content all over the board this week. Rolling EyesRolling Eyes

Hugh Ruka
Exploratio et Industria Morispatia
Posted - 2008.10.28 09:30:00 - [7]
 

this will just put in a fixed price ration to dysp/cad ... once dysp will get too expensive, cad will follow suit because why would you sell below maximum profit ?

it's the same with invention and t2 bpos ... prices are effectively caped at invention levels, moving only with input materialp rices and t2 bpo owners are still making a solid profit on the whole system.

it's just a time delay on the price increases ... until all (or most) of the cad moons are also controled by dysp alliances, then they can inflate prices again as they like ...

Rawne Karrde
Bre-X Interstellar Shipyards
Ejectile Dysfunction
Posted - 2008.10.28 12:44:00 - [8]
 

So cad goes up and the gallente racial material then becomes tied to dyspro, promethium increases are now gonna influence caldari racial material... this is gonna be interesting.

Arthor Dark
Nex Exercitus
IT Alliance
Posted - 2008.10.28 14:33:00 - [9]
 

Edited by: Arthor Dark on 28/10/2008 14:33:19
Does it seem to anyone that this change and the blog were hastily put together? as evidenced from the mistakes in it?

(1) ferrofluid and not ferrogel
(2) would take 20x longer to make 1000 units, and not 10x
(3) there are 4x as many cadmium moons, and not 20x


Verite Rendition
Caldari
F.R.E.E. Explorer
EVE Animal Control
Posted - 2008.10.28 15:14:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Arthor Dark
Edited by: Arthor Dark on 28/10/2008 14:33:19
Does it seem to anyone that this change and the blog were hastily put together? as evidenced from the mistakes in it?

(1) ferrofluid and not ferrogel
(2) would take 20x longer to make 1000 units, and not 10x
(3) there are 4x as many cadmium moons, and not 20x

Thank goodness, I'm not the only one that sees this. If they build a 20:1 reaction with only 4x more Cad moons, it's going to screw things up something awful. All the cadmium in the game would be consumed in only expanding the Dysprosium supply by 20%.

Arthor Dark
Nex Exercitus
IT Alliance
Posted - 2008.10.28 15:20:00 - [11]
 

I am disappointed something awful with this change. And yes, I have a stockpile of Neo and Thulium :( The flaw of the r64 moons was pointed out long ago, and what do they do? come out with a hastily thought out bandaid measure that doesn't do much.

Clair Bear
Ursine Research and Production
Posted - 2008.10.28 15:57:00 - [12]
 

This is going to put SOOO much extra ISK into promethium and dysprosium moon owners pockets that it's not even amusing.

1. Dump stockpile of pro/dysp on market, crashing prices for a few days.
2. Accumulate cadmium and ice fuel
3. Completely stop selling prom & dysp
4. Wait for producers to ramp up, sell cadmium and ice
5. GOTO 1, but now with help of panicked producers

A license to see-saw with ever widening price swings. Anyone savvy enough to be in the promethium/dysprosium moon business is going to naturally follow the lead of such manipulation.

Tasko Pal
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.10.28 17:41:00 - [13]
 

Potentially doubling the supply of dyspro and prom products sounded interesting. Increasing it by 20% isn't so much. Still we'll see what the effect is over a few months.

Originally by: Clair Bear
This is going to put SOOO much extra ISK into promethium and dysprosium moon owners pockets that it's not even amusing.

1. Dump stockpile of pro/dysp on market, crashing prices for a few days.
2. Accumulate cadmium and ice fuel
3. Completely stop selling prom & dysp
4. Wait for producers to ramp up, sell cadmium and ice
5. GOTO 1, but now with help of panicked producers

A license to see-saw with ever widening price swings. Anyone savvy enough to be in the promethium/dysprosium moon business is going to naturally follow the lead of such manipulation.


More than the default now?

1. Sell prom, dyspro on the market.
2. Market mischief as desired.
3. Goto 1.

My take is that current opportunities are pretty damn good even if all you do is sell dyspro and prom. And I'm dubious about the market savviness of the dyspro/prom miner. They need power to hold a moon. But that's not the same skill set as trading. Even a "minerals are free" trader can run the trade side and get most of the profit available.


Clair Bear
Ursine Research and Production
Posted - 2008.10.28 19:19:00 - [14]
 

Originally by: Tasko Pal

More than the default now?





Yes, more so. Remember that holding a dyspro moon is not a single-man job, it's an alliance-wide effort.

Now there is an extra tool in the toolbox for creating market havoc.

If you read between the lines (see: unpopular t2 components produced WELL below researched BPO production costs consistently) there appears to be an effort to limit the amount of dyspro flowing into the economy. That was all that could be done -- produce goods which don't compete with production of your customers, sell limited amounts of product at a high price.

Now there's a whole new linked mineral to deal with. If not toyed with it will cut into the bottom line. The natural outcome is a strategy to manipulate both products. Simply restricting the flow to keep prices high is not enough.

Which isn't bad. If my theory is right there will be great waves to ride on this one.

Jian Gi
Caldari
Exiled Gathering
HELL4S
Posted - 2008.10.29 12:15:00 - [15]
 

Cost Analysis
Assumption:
1) Buy all materials out of market.
2) Prices out of eve-central.
3) Inefficiencies due to refining transport etc are not accounted.

Costs
A) Medium Tower ~ 80 mil/month (with sov and faction pos) => 11.1k ISK/cycle
B) 5 hafnium/cycle @ 800isk/unit => 4kisk/cycle
C) 100 Cadmium/cycle @ 1000isk/unit => 100k isk/cycle

Total Cost per cycle to produce 10 ferrofluids/cycle is ~115k
Hence cost of producing ferrofluids this way is 11.5k /unit.

You can adjust these with more accurate price data to set base costs
of operating such a reaction.

Cheers

P.S. The catch of course is that your output volume/cycle is very low. So to get to total profit assumimg a 10k/unit profit on ferrofluid(ie 100%profit margin), 10 units/cycle production and 720cycles/month => 10k*10*720=72mil/month profit.
Not worth it in my opinion for all the hassle...

Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
Posted - 2008.10.29 12:23:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Clair Bear
Yes, more so. Remember that holding a dyspro moon is not a single-man job, it's an alliance-wide effort.


5000 people to take (also impossible to take unless you have heaps of isk (re: already have an existing dyspro moon).
2000 people to hold.
1 person to exploit.

This is where the balance is off. Those same 5000 people could take 100 moons and it's not going to be a lot harder to exploit than the single one.

Shifting the balance so that you need more people for the exploitation phase is good game balance, and will actually INCREASE the total value of the 0.0 space, it just won't be quite so easy to print isk with a single char.

It also means that while fighting wars over space is good, people will be less able to hold far more space than they need just to exploit a couple of moons. Thus once again giving the feeling that there is more space without CCP having to seed more regions yet again.

Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
Posted - 2008.10.29 12:27:00 - [17]
 

Originally by: Verite Rendition
All the cadmium in the game would be consumed in only expanding the Dysprosium supply by 20%.


This is the real stuff up.

Couple it with the fact that Cadmium is hardly minimally exploited (although not completely exploited, it's not exactly entirely unused) and the fact that you still need it to make 2 other reactions (one of which alone could use twice as much cadmium as exists).

20:1 is ridiculous.

Clair Bear
Ursine Research and Production
Posted - 2008.10.30 03:50:00 - [18]
 

Originally by: Lord Fitz
(also impossible to take unless you have heaps of isk (re: already have an existing dyspro moon).


That's the part I don't get. A dyspro moon generates what, something like 3B a month? That's only 100M a day. And you have to fuel it, defend it, hold SOV to cyno jam it, haul product to empire...

Meanwhile a good ratting system can generate 60-100M *AN HOUR*. More if people are also mining and plexing. A level 4 agent has no in-game cap on ISK generated per unit time -- the gating factor is number of bodies out there mulching the +.

Why all the hubbub over dyspro moons? There's more efficient ways to churn out fodder for the war machine.

Kazzac Elentria
Posted - 2008.10.30 04:57:00 - [19]
 

Originally by: Clair Bear
Originally by: Lord Fitz
(also impossible to take unless you have heaps of isk (re: already have an existing dyspro moon).


That's the part I don't get. A dyspro moon generates what, something like 3B a month? That's only 100M a day. And you have to fuel it, defend it, hold SOV to cyno jam it, haul product to empire...

Meanwhile a good ratting system can generate 60-100M *AN HOUR*. More if people are also mining and plexing. A level 4 agent has no in-game cap on ISK generated per unit time -- the gating factor is number of bodies out there mulching the +.

Why all the hubbub over dyspro moons? There's more efficient ways to churn out fodder for the war machine.


Its more the fact that moon mining stations also count towards sov that many of us take issue with.

IMHO it should either be a military post, or an industrial post. Not both.

Lord Fitz
Project Amargosa
Posted - 2008.10.30 09:12:00 - [20]
 

Originally by: Clair Bear
Originally by: Lord Fitz
(also impossible to take unless you have heaps of isk (re: already have an existing dyspro moon).


That's the part I don't get. A dyspro moon generates what, something like 3B a month? That's only 100M a day. And you have to fuel it, defend it, hold SOV to cyno jam it, haul product to empire...

Meanwhile a good ratting system can generate 60-100M *AN HOUR*. More if people are also mining and plexing. A level 4 agent has no in-game cap on ISK generated per unit time -- the gating factor is number of bodies out there mulching the +.

Why all the hubbub over dyspro moons? There's more efficient ways to churn out fodder for the war machine.


A dyspro moon makes at least 5.2b / month (down from almost 7b / month) and this is to buy orders.

I personally fuelled 32 towers, in about 6 hours a month. That's 27.7 billion isk per hour.

Now laugh at the 60-100m/hr.

OBVIOUSLY there is some effort in taking the towers, and defending them the one in every 12 months that it gets attacked (on average). But it's still ridiculously easy.

Trading Bunnz
Equatorial Industires
Barely-Legal
Posted - 2008.10.30 11:11:00 - [21]
 

And of course there is the fact that you can mine/rat whatever to earn 100m/hr WHILE your moon is busy earning you isk as well. Its true "afk" income generation, except for brief spurts of "zomg, playing with pos hell" moments.

Tasko Pal
Aliastra
Posted - 2008.10.30 12:01:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Lord Fitz

I personally fuelled 32 towers, in about 6 hours a month. That's 27.7 billion isk per hour.


Using GTCs as a gauge of measurement, that's around $3k per hour. Typical for lawyer fees in major corporation mergers. Too bad it's only 6 hours a month! Surprised

Zanzaa
Amarr
Posted - 2008.10.30 19:45:00 - [23]
 

It doesn't seem to be quite so much as 3k/hour by my calculations..

probably closer to 1500usd/hour

I'd say the entire lot could be sold for 9k US

that's probably enough to put 600 accounts in the game

Makes sense when you think about the likely-hood that out there we got at least 1 alliance that's paying people real cash for their efforts.

Clair Bear
Ursine Research and Production
Posted - 2008.10.30 21:13:00 - [24]
 

Originally by: Zanzaa


Makes sense when you think about the likely-hood that out there we got at least 1 alliance that's paying people real cash for their efforts.


Very nice. Learn something new every day.

Now I see why some people call eve a true capitalism simulator. Once you get to ludicrous levels of income you can simply buy up all the high SP characters when they come on the market, insuring the bulk of newcomers will never catch up or compete in any meaningful way. Sexy, sexy, sexy.


Kazzac Elentria
Posted - 2008.10.31 03:37:00 - [25]
 

Originally by: Zanzaa

Makes sense when you think about the likely-hood that out there we got at least 1 alliance that's paying people real cash for their efforts.


At certain aspects of the game, you would almost have to.

Do you really want to spend your 3 hours of play time a day doing nothing but fueling towers, queuing up 30 jobs every 6 hours across a few accounts, etc...



 

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