open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Stupid manufacturers and lack of an economy of scale
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

Author Topic

Mirt T
Posted - 2008.05.14 18:18:00 - [91]
 

Originally by: KHEN
Edited by: KHEN on 14/05/2008 06:49:30

Originally by: Gamer4liff
Originally by: Chainsaw Plankton


There are only a few ships that don't worth inventing : Lachesis, Rook, some transport ships, 50% of the command ships and the logistic ships. It's because the demand is small for these ships, they never sold well or at high prices, and the T2 bpo holders own the market



I don't know about other t2 ship bpo holders but i see a lot of ships below my production costs.

Jessica 415
Posted - 2008.05.14 18:26:00 - [92]
 

Originally by: Algia Knightstorm


The end product costs the same so that people getting in to it can compete with you. If you had it even better and could undercut everyone because you can make EVEN MORE at LESS COST how would they compete? they wouldn't. Why would anybody move into production if tey can't compete? They Wouldn't. You would effectivly kill off a trade.




so lets make a new player in a frig able to fight a Battleship flying player in a even match.

raven415
Caldari
Special Projects Corp
Posted - 2008.05.14 18:28:00 - [93]
 

Originally by: Dingo
Venkul Mul
The value of my minerals is exactly the price at which I can sell them on market. Doing extra work to sell the end product at the same or lower price is idiot.

You sir are quite wrong!

I value my minerals at 0 isk becasue they are sitting out in space waiting to be mined. If I mine 8 mill tritanium for a Battle Ship it's cost me nothing (I know what your going to say but the cost of mining drones and crystals is next too nothing) The industrialist who buys his minerals off the market to build the same Battle Ship has to sell them again above the value he bought them at in order to make a profit, wheres the sence in that?


you sir need to consider your time if its worth nothing i have a job for you paying nothing.

cal nereus
The Graduates
Morsus Mihi
Posted - 2008.05.14 18:33:00 - [94]
 

I'm just going to use myself as an example of a small-time salesperson:

As long as my small quantity of used products are equally effective and just as valuable as a big manufacturer's large quantity of newly built products, I will continue to feel free to undercut prices. I see three reasons for this: used products are just as good as new products, my top priority is selling fast and not necessarily for profit, and selling in bulk has no apparent benefit.

Now, if used products were somehow less effective than newly built products, and/or if there was some noticeable cost reduction in building in bulk, we could see some real changes to these trends.


Quelque Chose
New Eden Roller Disco Supply
Posted - 2008.05.14 18:54:00 - [95]
 

Originally by: Dingo
Venkul Mul
The value of my minerals is exactly the price at which I can sell them on market. Doing extra work to sell the end product at the same or lower price is idiot.

You sir are quite wrong!

I value my minerals at 0 isk becasue they are sitting out in space waiting to be mined. If I mine 8 mill tritanium for a Battle Ship it's cost me nothing (I know what your going to say but the cost of mining drones and crystals is next too nothing) The industrialist who buys his minerals off the market to build the same Battle Ship has to sell them again above the value he bought them at in order to make a profit, wheres the sence in that?


Guys like this are why you shouldn't get into building Ravens kids. There are still some parts of mfg that are worth your time, but unfortunately a lot of shipbuilding is dominated by these clods who think that trading 100m worth of minerals plus a 20m BPC plus some odd few thousand in slot costs for 90m ISK is Teh Besterest Way To Git Rich EVAR.

Not surprisingly, this guy is Caldari and most likely lives in The Forge... along with a screaming zillion others of his ilk.

Justar Geban
Retribution. Inc.
E-P-O-C-H
Posted - 2008.05.14 19:05:00 - [96]
 

I agree that there needs to be more specialized manufacturing available. Here's how I'd do it:

Take my favorite item, missile launchers. A BP(x) had a max runs of, say 100. (can't remember off the top of my head) Regular production works as normal. *But* -- if someone wants to invest the time and resources, they can create 'named' items from this, too.

- Add an item - call it a "precision toolkit" or something (functions like a decryptor)
- Manufacturer puts in BP/toolkit in for a max-run *time* (how long it would take to build 100 meta 1 items)
- Manufacturer then chooses the meta level:
Meta 1: 100 regular T1 launchers
Meta 2: 20 'Malkuth' launchers, takes the same time as 100 meta 1 and say twice the materials of one meta 1 (so 40% of 100 T1's)
Meta 3: 5 'Limos' launchers, takes the same time as 100 meta 1 and 3x the materials
Meta 4: 1 'Arbalest' launcher, takes the same time as 100 meta 1 and 4x the materials

No changes to the market needed for fractional meta-levels. Different toolkits could increase/decrease the time for the run while changing the materials needed, just like current. Say the "OCD" toolkit would increase the time to 110% of a max-run job, but would save 10% of the materials, while the "MacGuyver" toolkit would do the reverse.

Flame on Very Happy

Quelque Chose
New Eden Roller Disco Supply
Posted - 2008.05.14 19:11:00 - [97]
 

Originally by: cal nereus
I'm just going to use myself as an example of a small-time salesperson:

As long as my small quantity of used products are equally effective and just as valuable as a big manufacturer's large quantity of newly built products, I will continue to feel free to undercut prices. I see three reasons for this: used products are just as good as new products, my top priority is selling fast and not necessarily for profit, and selling in bulk has no apparent benefit.

Now, if used products were somehow less effective than newly built products, and/or if there was some noticeable cost reduction in building in bulk, we could see some real changes to these trends.




You're not the problem. If there's a huge, perfectly good supply of product [x] on the used market then that should tip any manufacturer off that they ought not be building more of it in the first place. Supply, demand, blah blah blah.

And as much as it would be a cash cow for me I'm not much interested in seeing equipment degrade as it racks up mileage. Too much hassle, no fun, and there's already a significant chance that some evildoer will make it asplode anyway.

Pan Crastus
Anti-Metagaming League
Posted - 2008.05.14 19:17:00 - [98]
 

Originally by: Kerfira
Edited by: Kerfira on 14/05/2008 10:09:59
Originally by: Pan Crastus
NPC couriers / Interbus would probably fix this for a while.

The NPC courier idea is actually one of the worst ever to have come from these forums.

The only reason anything has any value in this game is because some people spent real time acquiring or making it. In essence, there's no real difference between making hauling take no effort and making mining no effort. They're essentially the same as the value is created by putting time into doing it.




Noone wants to put more time into making ISK than necessary. This is why half of EVE sells GTCs for ISK, uses macro mining, macro ratting etc. ...

More examples for "AFK" income in EVE:
* Datacores from R&D agents
* Researching and copying blueprints
* reselling stuff on the market (sit in Jita and buy cheap & mark up)
etc. etc.

Either remove all of these or add something that replaces hauling - because noone wants to do this really, it costs far too much time to be worth it.


Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2008.05.14 20:10:00 - [99]
 

Originally by: Dingo
I value my minerals at 0 isk becasue they are sitting out in space waiting to be mined. If I mine 8 mill tritanium for a Battle Ship it's cost me nothing (I know what your going to say but the cost of mining drones and crystals is next too nothing)
What you're missing is that the minerals do cost something, even if you mine them yourself. Or, rather, they represent value that you're trowing in the wind without considering its true worth.

Not knowing whether you actually spend 8M trit per BS, or if you're just rounding up, I'll just look at the cost of the base material requirements on the BP and compare those to the current market value of minerals. Going by those numbers, right now, if you sold the minerals needed for, say, a Raven directly on the market, you would make roughly 81mil ISK. This is how much the time spent collecting those minerals is worth.

Compare this with the 90mil you'd get for said Raven if you want to stay competetive. The 9mil difference needs to pay for all the production costs (BPs, drones, mining crystals, facilities, all the bits and bobs).

So the question is, do you actually make any money from turning those minerals into a BS, or would you make hellalot more if you just dumped the minerals you collect onto the market and forgot about the manufacturing?

Where many "mine your own"-producers go wrong is that they think that time investment is worth nothing, when it is, in fact worth 81 mil and not an ISK less. On selling their BS, they think they get a 90mil profit, and fail to deduct that initial investment and how much it is worth.

As for the producers who buy from the market, they may or may not pay more for the minerals, but their time investment is next to zero. Click, buy, done. They just did your 81mil worth of work in 15 seconds flat.

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2008.05.14 20:19:00 - [100]
 

Originally by: Pan Crastus
Originally by: Kerfira
My post

Noone wants to put more time into making ISK than necessary. This is why half of EVE sells GTCs for ISK, uses macro mining, macro ratting etc. ...

More examples for "AFK" income in EVE:
* Datacores from R&D agents
* Researching and copying blueprints
* reselling stuff on the market (sit in Jita and buy cheap & mark up)
etc. etc.

Either remove all of these or add something that replaces hauling - because noone wants to do this really, it costs far too much time to be worth it.

You're pretty much completely missing the point...

"Making your profession easier will not make you more money/time!"

As I said, items are valued in EVE by how much time is invested in their acquisition (apart from items that are 'rare').
Make that acquisition easier, and more people will do it because it is now an easier ISK maker than others, and then the rewards will decrease until an equilibrium is reached again. This is basic economics.

It is exactly the same as the case many miners have brought forward plenty of times ("give us better mining ships!"). In the end it'll not bring you more income, but just reduce options for players on how they play.

Just because 'noone wants to do this really' is NOT a valid reason for removing game features. Each profession has their 'grind' to make money, and it is completely necessary for the game like this to work.
Time spent is the real currency of EVE, not ISK.

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2008.05.14 20:26:00 - [101]
 

Originally by: Kerfira

Time spent is the real currency of EVE, not ISK.



And that is what "minerals are free" people don't get, damaging people that want to work in the production (mining/building) industry and get a reasonable return.

Jenna Shame
Posted - 2008.05.14 20:39:00 - [102]
 

If people are selling below cost, the solution is obvious.

Mostly its just whining.

Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2008.05.14 20:49:00 - [103]
 

Originally by: Venkul Mul
Originally by: Kerfira
Time spent is the real currency of EVE, not ISK.


And that is what "minerals are free" people don't get, damaging people that want to work in the production (mining/building) industry and get a reasonable return.

I mostly agree, except for one thing.
For these people (who're not dealing in large amounts of stuff), it is easier to sell the minerals if they 'pack' them into a single battleship for example.
Micromanaging mineral sales is a pain.....

Bish Ounen
Gallente
Best Path Inc.
Cult of War
Posted - 2008.05.14 21:07:00 - [104]
 

Originally by: raven415

you sir need to consider your time if its worth nothing i have a job for you paying nothing.


You seem to have forgotten one thing:

Time spent only matters if you are doing WORK.

What do I mean? Well, allow me to explain; EvE is a game. An MMORPG, to be precise. People play EvE for various reasons, but most people play because it is a form of relaxation and entertainment (employees of various farming groups excluded). Many players are not interested in the "market" aspect of the game, beyond that the market is able to provide them the things they need to make the gaming experience more enjoyable.

Indeed, many of the players are not even interested in the PVP aspect of the game (Yours Truly excluded), and are after the more "social" aspects of the game, up to and including RPing. Many of the more socially oriented players are often in "carebear" corps and alliances that will happily hop in their mining ships, and while chatting merrily away in their voice comm of choice, will blithely sit and empty out a belt of all it's roids.

Now, you look at this, as a non-miner, and see hours of boring labor to get to the actual "game" portion of EvE. For them THIS IS THE GAME. THIS is what they enjoy doing. The goal is to mine as much as possible, and to chat with buddies. The ore they mine is merely a byproduct of the experience, and a way to measure their progress.

So these miners get done emptying out that belt, get back to the Empire station they are based out of, and see all the ore. What do they do with it? Well lookie here! They can SELL that ore right there on the market! Even better, if they have good refining skills (might as well train that up once the mining skills are maxed out in a month or two) they can refine the ore and sell the minerals for EVEN MORE ISK! and now they all have big fat wallets and can go get cool stuff like mining implants and cargo rigs and T2 mining ships etc etc etc.

All of this is just them playing the game the way they want to play it. Using the great big sandbox of EvE to have fun and relax. All I see you doing is trying to take your playstyle, and force the way YOU want things to be on everybody else. Which, if I have read both your and the OP's posts correctly, would basically make EvE more expensive and LESS fun for pretty much EVERYBODY except the well established Industrialists and the "Market players".

Sorry, you just aren't going to get your way. You'll just have to be happy with the billions you have already, ya big whiners. Frigging cry me a river already.


Kerfira
Kerfira Corp
Posted - 2008.05.14 21:10:00 - [105]
 

Originally by: Bish Ounen
Post...

Well said Cool

Alz Shado
EverFlow
Posted - 2008.05.14 21:21:00 - [106]
 

Refining, like manufacturing, should require more than a pulse and a left finger.

I'm solidly against removing the T1 loot drops from missions, because they do provide a secondary income source for new pilots and are a legitimate trade item. However, due to the ease of reprocessing over mass selling (select all-Reprocess-ok vs. select each one, click sell item, click sell item again in new window, repeat) and the minor reduction in profits vs. someone who spent months training up their reprocessing skills, most NPCers are willing to take the hit on their loot rather than sell at market value.

I would suggest loot reprocessing require specific skills for each class of module, just as mining reprocessing does for each type of ore, with significant penalties for untrained pilots. Drop the efficiency of all stations to 25% for unskilled reprocessors. Modify "Refining" and "Refiner Efficiency" so each level adds 5%, so LV 5 Refining = 50%, and Lv Refinery Efficiency = 75%. Then, add in skills for high, medium, and low powered modules, so that each of those boost their corresponding efficiency by 5%. Items that don't fall into those categories, such as ships, ammo, and alloys, require the Scrapmetal Processing V to reach full efficiency.

Finally, allow for multiple items to be sold simultaneously. The selected items are offered to the highest buy order. Items without high bidders are left in the hangar.

Alz Shado
EverFlow
Posted - 2008.05.14 21:23:00 - [107]
 

Originally by: Pan Crastus
Noone wants to put more time into making ISK than necessary...Either remove all of these or add something that replaces hauling - because noone wants to do this really, it costs far too much time to be worth it.
Without a cost of losing, PvP in EVE is meaningless.

KHEN
New Horizons
Posted - 2008.05.14 21:27:00 - [108]
 

Originally by: Bish Ounen
All I see you doing is trying to take your playstyle, and force the way YOU want things to be on everybody else.


Yes, some peeps posting in these forums are permanently unsatisfied jerks, always whining and complaining, and asking all the time for changes in the game mechanics. That's boring

Pan Crastus
Anti-Metagaming League
Posted - 2008.05.14 21:47:00 - [109]
 

Originally by: Alz Shado
Originally by: Pan Crastus
Noone wants to put more time into making ISK than necessary...Either remove all of these or add something that replaces hauling - because noone wants to do this really, it costs far too much time to be worth it.
Without a cost of losing, PvP in EVE is meaningless.


No it's not, we have killboards.

Shakuul
Caldari
RuffRyders
Axiom Empire
Posted - 2008.05.14 21:50:00 - [110]
 

Originally by: Kerfira
Funny thing about the people whining about 'opportunity cost', 'undercutting', etc.....

What seems illogical to you isn't so to others.

Let me just make an example here.....

Lets say that I've not trained trading to a high level, and that I sell high-end named items found in mission loot and ships produced from refined mission loot.

From my perspective, I have two objectives:
1. Sell fast so my trading orders aren't occupied for weeks on end.
2. Not spending time micromanaging sales orders.

Your high priority of 'make the most money possible' is so far down the list I can't even see it!

So, I'll happily put up my goods/ships at 10% lower than current high, as this will fulfill both my primary objectives. Selling minerals instead of ships might make me a few more ISK, but'd violate objective #2.



Right, people may have different objectives. Maybe people manufacture at a loss, just for fun. Maybe people like you just enjoy spending very little time trading, and selling a lot, regardless of the amount you actually make. These just seem like really wacky utility functions.

I think Akita's assumption was that trading or manufacturing are simply means to an end - more isk, which is itself a means to an end - ability to lose 1bil isk ships in pvp every weekend. I don't think this is an unreasonable assumption. If you accept this assumption, the logic applies to everyone ... that's logic.

I mean, do people actually ENJOY right clicking their blueprints and choosing items to build, even though they could make more by selling the minerals, or not manufacturing in the first place? Maybe they do...

Do you actually ENJOY seeing lots of green items in your wallet (sell orders) far more than you would enjoy having a large wallet, so much so that you are willing to sacrifice profit just to get a high volume? This intuitively doesn't seem to make sense.

Originally by: Apocryphai
What you're forgetting is that EVE's economy isn't a capitalist economy. A capitalist economy relies on 2 main classes - a ruling class that owns the means of production and a working class that labours for the ruling class at a wage rate lower than the value of the goods they produce.




You should update your economic theory a bit, read some people after Marx. Modern capitalist economies have VERY LARGE service industries. Offhand I think the US GDP is about 60% services.

Originally by: Apocryphai
Therefore traditional capitalist economic thinking, which is what you're doing here Akita, simply doesn't work. You're trying to apply ideas that work in our current real world to a game environment and that would simply break the game. Nobody wants to pay 8/month (or whatever it is, I pay with ISK these days) for a second job!



He's just saying people are dumb (thus the title "stupid manufacturers"). He's trying to apply LOGIC given reasonable assumptions about people's desires, and arguing that people are acting irrationally given their assumed desires. This really has very little to do with capitalism. If you're acting irrationally you're acting irrationally regardless of the economic system.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.05.14 22:18:00 - [111]
 

Originally by: Shakuul
Modern capitalist economies have VERY LARGE service industries. Offhand I think the US GDP is about 60% services.

USA GDP - composition by sector

Agriculture: 0.9%
Industry: 20.6%
Services: 78.5% (2007 est.)

Taken from CIA Factbook

Dr Caymus
Gallente
Applied Technologies Inc
Agents of Fortune
Posted - 2008.05.14 22:24:00 - [112]
 

Hmm, well, our corporation does a little manufacturing, and over the years we have consistently earned what we consider to be meaningful profits. In our most recent week, we reaped a gross margin on sales of 27.25% with a mix of T1 and T2 products. Year to date, we're running 22.66%. We had a banner year in 2007, earning a 31.66% margin by stockpiling huge inventories of cruise missiles prior to the torpedo nerf, and in 2006 we pushed 19.84% of our sales through to the gross margin line.

I consider these to be good numbers, given the game's current operating environment. The days of 500 million ISK Hulks are over... that was not reality. "Invention" (though I still do not like the name... "duplication" would be better...) is reality.

We've worked hard to achieve these results: extensive analysis of what to manufacture and where to sell it, agility and adaptability to new product lines, well-planned infrastructure for raw material procurement, focused manufacturing staff, etc. In my view, many of these success factors are evidence that we have achieved a certain "economy of scale".

With that said, I do agree with a couple of points being made here.

First, it is too easy to enter the field of manufacturing. Any character can train a few simple skills on the side and start building a wide range of products at competitive costs, while continuing to pursue whatever other main career they have chosen. Sure, it takes a little more to get into building T2 stuff, but with 200 thousand characters out there, the T2 arena is oversaturated with producers as well.

Suggestions for change? The entry level skill set, those basic skills needed to manufacture T1, are pretty good. However, the range over which cost, volume and time benefits are earned through skilling up should be much broader. For example, perhaps you should be able to build your own replacement Raven with a few level 1 skills, but it should cost you alot more than I (with all relevant skills at level 5) to build it. Not just the current, what?, 10% more... maybe 80% more... more along the lines of the ME ranges that have been established with negative ME T2 bpcs. Same for PE skills and manufacturing slot skills. All of these skills should be ranked higher than current (more training time required per level) and all of these skills should have two tiers (basic skill and advanced skill for 10 effective levels).

I would also support increased skill requirements, along the same lines, for T2 production.

Second, there is no product differentiation. Everything is a commodity. Well, maybe this is a slight exaggeration... I know there are named, faction, and officer variants of basic items... but let's face it, your 2 million Wrath Cruise Missiles for sale at Jita IV-4 are absolutely no different than my 2 million Wrath Cruise Missiles for sale at Jita IV-4 (except for the next 5 minutes, mine are priced .01 lower Laughing)

Suggestions? This is a much more exciting area of opportunity for improvement. I like the idea of variations in product quality... maybe if I add a little extra Nocxium, my Wraths will hit little harder than the base model... or maybe if I add a Mining Laser Upgrade to the input component list, my Hulk will mine a little faster than the base model. This would open the door for product branding and marketing... "the ATI Wrath Cruise Missile - There's Nothing Stronger" or "Got Roids? Pop 'Em Faster in your ATI Hulk!" And what would be really cool would be true player invention, with reasonable-term patent rights, of totally new items.

I'm sure implementation of these things would be mind-boggling and resource-gobbling, but imagine the possibilities here...









Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
Posted - 2008.05.14 22:50:00 - [113]
 

Originally by: Dr Caymus


Suggestions for change? The entry level skill set, those basic skills needed to manufacture T1, are pretty good. However, the range over which cost, volume and time benefits are earned through skilling up should be much broader. For example, perhaps you should be able to build your own replacement Raven with a few level 1 skills, but it should cost you alot more than I (with all relevant skills at level 5) to build it. Not just the current, what?, 10% more... maybe 80% more... more along the lines of the ME ranges that have been established with negative ME T2 bpcs. Same for PE skills and manufacturing slot skills. All of these skills should be ranked higher than current (more training time required per level) and all of these skills should have two tiers (basic skill and advanced skill for 10 effective levels).



I just have to laugh a little at this.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.05.14 23:05:00 - [114]
 

Edited by: Akita T on 14/05/2008 23:05:54


Well, he should be the one to know then, shouldn't he ? Wink

Besides, I see nothing wrong with a couple new "rank 8/12/16" skills or such in Industry, ranging from "Efficient Frigate Manufacture" (prerequisites PE5 and Frigate Construction 5) that would reduce frigate construction costs by 5% per level, and a further tier of skills like "Advanced Frigate Manufacture" that would reduce waste in frigate construction by 10% per level... then upper-cap reprocessing of ships and modules to 75% (instead of 100%)
Well, that, or ramp up waste for ME 0 higher, just high enough so the new "discount" skill will put it back to 10% overall waste, and don't touch the reprocessing side at all.
So, for instance, somebody at "all L5 skills" will manufacture ALL frigates at 25% discount compared to somebody with just PE5... but it would also heavily reduce the manufacture cost of INVENTED T2 frigates.

It doesn't need to be all that complicated, but you get the idea : a skill that can (almost) nullify negative ME, and another that would allow for "perfect manufacture" from a ME0 blueprint, but only in very small niche sectors of the industry, with a hefty SP investment.
In other words, you can always make a profit in one corner, but only as long as you don't get too many competitors.

Which sounds just about perfect.

___


I mean, you don't get to fly a Marauder loaded with T2 large guns that easy.
Why the hell should you be able to manufacture anything almost perfectly in a mater of months, skill-wise ?
Heck, for T1, it's more like weeks, not months.
Why not need a year, or longer ?
I mean, what's so difficult about pulling a damn trigger but so easy about optimizing a complicated manufacture blueprint's material requirements ?

Slave Runner
Posted - 2008.05.15 00:01:00 - [115]
 

/me votes for a purely industrial expansion

There is so much to fix and improve, we need to get it some developer prime time.

Oh and we need an 'Elite Mass Production' skill (rank 12-14) that gives +10 corporate POS slots per level. Adv Mass Production 5 as requirement.

Tsanse Kinske
WeMeanYouKnowHarm
Posted - 2008.05.15 00:02:00 - [116]
 

Originally by: Akita T
Edited by: Akita T on 14/05/2008 23:05:54


Well, he should be the one to know then, shouldn't he ? Wink

Besides, I see nothing wrong with a couple new "rank 8/12/16" skills or such in Industry, ranging from "Efficient Frigate Manufacture" (prerequisites PE5 and Frigate Construction 5)
...


I don't have a problem with it either, truth be told. Industry should to an extent mirror power and micro-specialization in PvP character development. Though it might need to be treated differently too, because industry is so much more solo-player oriented, and one player can pursue multiple activities at the same time. In PvP, three rookies can kill one vet easily. Could a dozen budding industrialists do the same to Dr Caymus if his suggestions were implemented?

I don't know, and am only abstractly interested in the answer. Really, I was just good-naturedly amused at that post.

Shakuul
Caldari
RuffRyders
Axiom Empire
Posted - 2008.05.15 00:30:00 - [117]
 

Originally by: Algia Knightstorm
The end product costs the same so that people getting in to it can compete with you. If you had it even better and could undercut everyone because you can make EVEN MORE at LESS COST how would they compete? they wouldn't. Why would anybody move into production if tey can't compete? They Wouldn't. You would effectivly kill off a trade.


God forbid people have to use like...teamwork (LOL) or something like that to effectively produce and compete. Does anyone remember the days when 100mil was a whole ton of money, back when BIG allowed you to buy battleship BPO shares and you got BPCs each week and eventually the whole BPO? Back then industry was actually kind of a big deal, now its like what everyone else has said...just a little side profession that takes 2 months to train that everyone can do.

Originally by: Alz Shado
I'm solidly against removing the T1 loot drops from missions, because they do provide a secondary income source for new pilots and are a legitimate trade item. However, due to the ease of reprocessing over mass selling (select all-Reprocess-ok vs. select each one, click sell item, click sell item again in new window, repeat) and the minor reduction in profits vs. someone who spent months training up their reprocessing skills, most NPCers are willing to take the hit on their loot rather than sell at market value.

I would suggest loot reprocessing require specific skills for each class of module, just as mining reprocessing does for each type of ore, with significant penalties for untrained pilots. Drop the efficiency of all stations to 25% for unskilled reprocessors. Modify "Refining" and "Refiner Efficiency" so each level adds 5%, so LV 5 Refining = 50%, and Lv Refinery Efficiency = 75%. Then, add in skills for high, medium, and low powered modules, so that each of those boost their corresponding efficiency by 5%. Items that don't fall into those categories, such as ships, ammo, and alloys, require the Scrapmetal Processing V to reach full efficiency.


You say that T1 NPC drops shouldn't be removed as a "legitimate source of modules for new players," but at the same time suggest adding more skills? Who would this really hurt, the new players, or the multi-billionaire industrialists with 3-10 accounts?

Originally by: Akita T
Originally by: Shakuul
Modern capitalist economies have VERY LARGE service industries. Offhand I think the US GDP is about 60% services.

USA GDP - composition by sector

Agriculture: 0.9%
Industry: 20.6%
Services: 78.5% (2007 est.)

Taken from CIA Factbook



There we go.

Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
Posted - 2008.05.15 07:10:00 - [118]
 

Originally by: Tsanse Kinske
[...]industry is so much more solo-player oriented, and one player can pursue multiple activities at the same time. In PvP, three rookies can kill one vet easily. Could a dozen budding industrialists do the same to Dr Caymus if his suggestions were implemented?[...]

Well, for starters, we're lacking the tools a serious real-life corporation has too.
We'd be needing some kind of "salary" or "wage" for corp members that "do stuff" (complete with some performance reviews or such), or even simple contracting work (and I mean the "I contract you to run this manufacture line with these materials, cash and blueprint, and I pay you this much for doing it".
We lack the economy of scale things I was talking about for "solo work" on a massive scale, and/or we lack the tools to "build" our particular flavour of an economy of scale via semi-automated means (be it either contracting or employment).

Manufacturing doesn't need to be a solo process... it's that way because in the current implementation, it needs total trust in the others that participate, and is not properly sequentiable (you either have all the needed materials or you don't... or you have to chat with somebody to bring you the materials, and you have to trust he'll bring them on time).

Apocryphai
Caldari
State Protectorate
Posted - 2008.05.15 08:05:00 - [119]
 

Originally by: Shakuul
You should update your economic theory a bit, read some people after Marx. Modern capitalist economies have VERY LARGE service industries. Offhand I think the US GDP is about 60% services.


Sorry, I was grossly simplifying for brevity. The term "means of production" of course has a far greater scope now than it did when Marx first used it because labour practices and methods have vastly expanded. Things like service industry are part of that relationship between capital and labour, as are infrastructures (even state-owned ones) such as healthcare, education and social services.

Service industries operate using concrete means of production in exactly the same way as any factory does, except the machinery in which the capital (dead labour) resides is in the form of rent for office space, IT & telecoms equipment, etc, and the product of the labour that goes on using this capital isn't a solid, tangible doohickey but instead is "customer service" or similar means of contributing to profitability of an industry.

And no, people aren't dumb in regards to industry in EVE - they're simply operating by different rules and systems to the real world. They're operating in a game and playing that game in a way that suits their enjoyment of it.

An example often raised on these forums is someone undercutting a supplier ina busy market by a large margin. These people are often lambasted by traders as being "stupid!" and "noobs!" when this happens. Yet the traders don't consider the reasons for this. Suicide gankers, for instance, often get large quantities of items they want to sell that they haven't produced themselves. They may therefore want a quick infusion of cash rather than having junk sat on the market for days/weeks since they may also have poor market skills and thus can only have a few orders up at a time. Therefore a fast, low priced sale may be more beneficial to them.

Other people may simply not enjoy checking prices carefully, looking at market price histories, having orders sat on the market for days/weeks, and thus just plop stuff on the market for what looks like ridiculously low prices but gets them what they want - fast, hassle-free sales.

And yes, the decisions people make often seem illogical from our own point of view - that's because human beings are illogical creatures, we're driven by desires and emotions and we all think and feel differently about things. If more players of MMORPGs would realise this (not helped by average player ages in the 'teens and twenties for most games) then MMORPG forums would be a lot less whiney and histrionic :p

Venkul Mul
Gallente
Posted - 2008.05.15 08:41:00 - [120]
 

Originally by: Bish Ounen


Sorry, you just aren't going to get your way. You'll just have to be happy with the billions you have already, ya big whiners. Frigging cry me a river already.




Very fun, and even apt. But no one his trying to implement a system that will force them to play differently. We are simply trying to educate them about what they are doing.

If they build stuff knowing that they are gettin less of what they will get selling the minerals and that doing that they are damaging people that want to use the market as a more complex tool, good for them. It can be even a form of PvP.


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5

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