These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Fixing Technetium

First post
Author
Xhaiden Ora
Doomheim
#241 - 2012-06-16 11:31:30 UTC
While I admittedly have little experience with null.....speaking as a mainly filthy highsec carebear one of my big problems that wards me off of active pvp is thus: Low hurts my sec status. FW are a mess. WH is too big a commitment and possibly a one way trip. That leaves me with Null. But the impression I get from null looking in from the outside is that its essentially just comprised of massive alliances. Against which I'd have fark and all hope of competing by myself or with any sort of corp I could reasonably muster. So there's zero incentive to go anywhere near null.

That said, from my "carebear but wish I had more to do" perspective, I like the idea of a null alliance generating passive income from the activities of players operating within its space. If you had incentive for non-alliance players to come perform their activities in your space ( The increased potential profit of null sec ) you'd have an avenue for other players both solo and smaller corps to come down to null in a way that benefits the alliances. While giving them a "team" to work for ( Tribalism always works ) without having to commit to joining a huge alliance.

Then an alliance would be charged with securing its space because you'd now be competing over a new type of passive revenue: Players. You want miners, explorers, traders, etc in your system for the passive income. But you'd have to ward off incursions from other people looking to harass your clientel. Because your clientel will move elsewhere under a different alliance if they're being harrassed too much in your system. If you had a mechanic to hire other corps in a similar vein to mercs ( Hiring an industrial corp to come do your mining or a merc corp to come provide some policing )...

That would open up all sorts of dickery and reasons to hate each other. Alliances hiring smaller officially unafficilated corporates or bribing pirates to go trash another competetor's "storefront" ( Nice ring mining you got here. Shame if anything happened to it. ) and drive their "customers" over to their space. Launching a major offensive on an opposing alliance would hurt their passive income as people fled the system to get out of the crossfire. Meanwhile the alliance itself could focus what it wanted, using its income to outsource the activities it doesn't want to do by making said activities profitable and attractive to other players to do for them.

You'd have bribery, deceit, politics, the crushing of morale, etc. Because you'd be controlling people as an ISK faucet and people are jerks. You'd also have avenue for solo players and smaller corps/alliances to get in on null action on behalf of larger alliances without having to sign up to a huge alliance or be shut out of null by a huge alliance. A large alliance with secure space could use other players as a workforce and/or cannonfodder.

Or at least I can dream anyway. I'd certainly waddle down to null then. But I suppose a goodly number of highsecers might still be petrified of it. -.-














SetrakDark
Doomheim
#242 - 2012-06-16 12:24:14 UTC
Aryth wrote:
CCP quite often gets the economic side wrong, because they don't have any economic dudes. While they have an economist, knowing EVE is the #1 thing. I am hopeful that with this system they get it right. Would hate to see them get completely outmaneuvered again by a handful of market wizards.


I mean, seriously here, how much does it cost to hire an unemployed ex-finance guy in Iceland? One horned helmet? Two? Two horned helmets and a box of rotten shark meat? Let`s get serious here and talk business.
Mr Kidd
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#243 - 2012-06-16 12:25:33 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Vokanic wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Bloodpetal wrote:

Yes. Unlimited pockets = bad. More importantly, are you THINKING about removing all moon goo income with Ring mining or just reducing it? I think the economy of moon goo will become bad quickly when you consider the cost of running a moon vs profits and it will probably die off in the face of ring mining. just throwing that out there. I'd be totally cool with removing almost all moon goo to ring mining. But I guess that's a tough answer from an economic stand point.


Just to quickly grab this one: I haven't entirely decided yet, but I'd like to take out all the moon mining and move it into ring mining. I'm not sure having a tower that basically mines money is a good idea compared to having a group of people doing an activity that the alliance then has some tools to tax.

That's another issue, making sure your alliances health/money is linked to your members. Right now it really isn't and I think EVE would be a better game if alliances would benefit more directly from their members actions, rather than a tower sitting somewhere.


You'd better make this ring mining the single most exciting thing to do in EvE, else it will kill off nullsec. As it stands, moon mining pays for space that alliances hold. It frees the members to log in and do what they want. Shackles etc. Granted tech lets stuff like burn jita and hulkageddon happen at zero cost to the aggressors, but that's not the point.

If you change that to: 'Mine X hours per member to keep your space'.. well it won't end well. (either they stop logging in, or sreegs gets to go on an all new bot banning rampage)


Might also force people to only hold as much space as they actually need :)



Lets face it, that income is directly attached to POSs makes the goal of income disruption a much larger investment on the part of those who wish to disrupt it. Next to mining, POS bashing is the single most boring activity in Eve IMO. It requires a determined and effectual foe to do it. Whereas, if the activity is player based, it lowers the bar to being disrupted and raises the bar to protect the activity while not necessarily making it any more difficult than it already is to protect the territory.

Making moon goo mining a more vulnerable and interactive activity is the way to go. I don't think the resource should be variable by region but by moon, planet, system within a region and in that order. Detach the activity from passive POS modules and make it a player based activity while retaining the current infrastructure level required to process the materials. I.E. some pos module with pg & cpu requirements high enough as to require, essentially, the same number of pos's to process this highly lucrative material as it does in the current moon goo mining system.

Ring mining sounds like it would be almost exactly that. That's what you should go with.

Don't ban me, bro!

Mutnin
SQUIDS.
#244 - 2012-06-16 12:28:15 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Mutnin wrote:

While I don't expect to hold something like a tech moon, there should be other resources we could fight over in the 500 to 1 bil isk/month range that bigger groups wouldn't be interested in.


These exist, right now. They are in the game at this very moment and you can fight over them right now, and most alliances won't bother to take them away.



Well as I mentioned I know little to nothing about moons/mining and so on but I did do a bit of research but there is very little to nothing online about incomes of moons other than everyone complaining or bragging about how much tech makes.

Best I could do was research how much the moon mining array would mine per month then do rough estimates of what the goo sells for on the markets. We live in Black Rise/ Placid area so limited to moons in those areas. While there is lots of tech moons around the area the rest all seemed very lackluster.

The figures I was coming up with, was barely enough to cover the POS fuel and not worth the effort. Toss a dog a bone and point me in the right direction, because I asked around and was told Neo and Dyspro were the only two worthwhile mid range moons but was told not to bother as they are hoarded up just as much as the tech moons by mid size groups.
Ravcharas
Infinite Point
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#245 - 2012-06-16 12:47:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Ravcharas
I thought this was higher on CCP's list of priorities, actually.

Maybe I'm remembering wrong but I think I've heard devs talk about moon rebalancing for the last couple of fanfests at least.
Mutnin
SQUIDS.
#246 - 2012-06-16 12:53:23 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
Mutnin wrote:

While I don't expect to hold something like a tech moon, there should be other resources we could fight over in the 500 to 1 bil isk/month range that bigger groups wouldn't be interested in.


These exist, right now. They are in the game at this very moment and you can fight over them right now, and most alliances won't bother to take them away.



Well as I mentioned I know little to nothing about moons/mining and so on but I did do a bit of research but there is very little to nothing online about incomes of moons other than everyone complaining or bragging about how much tech makes.

Best I could do was research how much the moon mining array would mine per month then do rough estimates of what the goo sells for on the markets. We live in Black Rise/ Placid area so limited to moons in those areas. While there is lots of tech moons around the area the rest all seemed very lackluster.

The figures I was coming up with, was barely enough to cover the POS fuel and not worth the effort. Toss a dog a bone and point me in the right direction, because I asked around and was told Neo and Dyspro were the only two worthwhile mid range moons but was told not to bother as they are hoarded up just as much as the tech moons by mid size groups.
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#247 - 2012-06-16 13:21:31 UTC
Mutnin wrote:

The figures I was coming up with, was barely enough to cover the POS fuel and not worth the effort. Toss a dog a bone and point me in the right direction, because I asked around and was told Neo and Dyspro were the only two worthwhile mid range moons but was told not to bother as they are hoarded up just as much as the tech moons by mid size groups.

Neo and dyspro, yes. Dyspro moons are still horded in people's regions, but you might be able to get one in lowsec.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Steph Wing
No Dukks Given
#248 - 2012-06-16 13:23:37 UTC
Weaselior wrote:
In addition, please make anyone interested in making moon minerals move around go probe out a constellation. If you want minerals to move around throw out that god-awful system.


People still probe for moon minerals? You mean the yields of all the moons in EVE haven't been collected into a single map book that's referred to by all the big alliances (and anybody with a few bucks to spare)?
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#249 - 2012-06-16 13:25:10 UTC
Steph Wing wrote:
Weaselior wrote:
In addition, please make anyone interested in making moon minerals move around go probe out a constellation. If you want minerals to move around throw out that god-awful system.


People still probe for moon minerals? You mean the yields of all the moons in EVE haven't been collected into a single map book that's referred to by all the big alliances (and anybody with a few bucks to spare)?

Would you like to buy our mapbook, I promise I didn't leave any tech moons off.

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Kimmi Chan
Tastes Like Purple
#250 - 2012-06-16 13:40:08 UTC
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Ring mining would be getting moon minerals through collaborative PVE. It would take it out of the hands of the alliances and into the players hands


How did I miss this thread.

LOL. WTF is "Collaborative PVE"? Is this something that's happening in EvE or some other game?

"Grr Kimmi  Nerf Chans!" ~Jenn aSide

www.eve-radio.com  Join Eve Radio channel in game!

Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#251 - 2012-06-16 13:40:51 UTC
Kimmi Chan wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Ring mining would be getting moon minerals through collaborative PVE. It would take it out of the hands of the alliances and into the players hands


How did I miss this thread.

LOL. WTF is "Collaborative PVE"? Is this something that's happening in EvE or some other game?

"mining incursions"

Head of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal Pubbie Management and Exploitation Division.

Lili Lu
#252 - 2012-06-16 14:18:42 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
CCP Soundwave wrote:
Ring mining might have to move back in favor or re-doing POSs.

In the meantime, I'd really just like to alchemy every single tier of moons (like it was done with 64s).



Do it.

And please: listen to Akita T this time.

Won't matter. Whether alchemy in the short term or ring mining in the long term, either term is still years away (see ship rebalancing).Straight
SetrakDark
Doomheim
#253 - 2012-06-16 14:53:07 UTC
Subs are currently on the rise and about to break an all-time high.

Owned.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#254 - 2012-06-16 15:17:35 UTC
SetrakDark wrote:
Subs are currently on the rise and about to break an all-time high.

Owned.


Link your source please.
Poetic Stanziel
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#255 - 2012-06-16 15:56:15 UTC  |  Edited by: Poetic Stanziel
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
I is mad!
Your whining about unsubbing is offtopic. I suspect you're just gravytraining on this particular thread to make some tear-filled point about the game not being fair to you. Take it elsewhere, please.
SetrakDark
Doomheim
#256 - 2012-06-16 16:17:46 UTC
It`s fine. It`s from a recent interview, though I didn`t save the link. I`ll post a link as soon as I see it again or I feel up to some searching. Or somebody else who has a link will post it in the meantime.
Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
#257 - 2012-06-16 17:03:57 UTC
Poetic Stanziel wrote:
from http://poeticstanziel.blogspot.ca/2012/06/fixing-technetium.html

All the goodwill I garnered with yesterday's post, I will now fritter away with this post. I will talk about an area of the game I'm not involved with, will not likely be involved with for some time. But it is an area of the game I enjoy spectating. Nullsec sovereignty.

(tl;dr: Technetium is a depleting resource. It depletes from a region, it begins to accumulate into another region.)

I sit here in Canada, all safe and in comfort, but I still take a keen interest in what goes on well outside my borders. The uprisings in Libya. The war in Afghanistan. The near civil war in Syria. The economic crisis in Greece. Or, when he was alive, Kim Jong Il looking at things.

It's really no different with EVE Online. I enjoy reading the political situations, the battle reports, the posturing of the big alliances in nullsec. For most of the last year, the action has been squarely in the northwest, with Goonswarm taking first Branch, and then Tenal. The action was multiplied when the Russians finally decided to have a disagreement, Shadow of xXDeathXx versus Solar Fleet, and finally with Red Alliance vacating their long held space and moving to Delve with nary an argument from the folks who were living there at the time of the move.

The Russian thing is over. Russians are pretty happy to keep the status quo unless you give grave insult to boiled cabbage. Nulli Secunda doesn't have the strength to but tickle Red Alliance, and Red Alliance seems content with the tickle fight. And then OTEC happened. The northwest is now all about the brohugs.

Nullsec seems to have entered a stagnant phase.

Goonswarm and the other technetium holding alliances are content to just play buddies and reap financial reward. I'm not saying that's wrong (I might do the same were I in The Mittani's shoes), but from a spectator perspective, it's boring. It's Chinese nullsec. Everyone bitches about Goonswarm and friends holding most of the technetium supply, yet nobody seems interested in trying to take a piece of the pie for themselves. From their perspectives, who can blame them, yet from a spectator perspective, damned boring.

So, how to drive conflict? The obvious answer is to entice alliances to chase ISK. Technetium is the perfect carrot. There's nothing wrong with having one resource be more valuable than any other. The game doesn't require balance in that respect. But the game should use that resource to entice players into conflict, especially players who get too comfortable having it.

The idea is to make technetium a finite resource, rotating technetium throughout New Eden over time. You take three adjacent regions, and give them 100% of the technetium in New Eden. Working clockwise, choose another three adjacent regions. As technetium is depleted from the first three regions, it begins to accumulate in the next three regions. As technetium is mined and depleted in those next three regions, it begins appearing in another three regions, in a clockwise direction around the map. I refer to this as chasing the ISK. Those that greatly desire to control technetium, will be enticed to chase it. The have-nots, as they get it, will be encouraged to defend it. The vast amounts of ISK that can be garnered from technetium encourage people to go to war over it. It is no longer a resource they sit on.

So, for example. Let's say CCP implemented this idea. The first three regions that will hold the entirety of New Eden's technetium supply will be Fade, Pure Blind and Deklein. As the moons in those regions are mined out, technetium will begin accumulating on moons in Branch, Tenal and Tribute. As the moons in those regions are depleted, technetium will begin collecting on moons in the Vale of the Silent, Geminate and Cobalt Edge regions. So on and so forth, until eventually technetium again returns to Fade, Pure Blind and Deklein.

You can think of technetium as a comet. A core central location with the greatest concentration of technetium, and the trailing tail with ever decreasing concentrations towards its end. This comet orbits the outer regions of New Eden on an 18 or so month cycle (given average moon mining tendencies.)

It's hard to predict what the players would do with such a system, how they'd attempt to game it, but I don't foresee any sort of equilibrium evolving. If technetium isn't mined, it doesn't accumulate elsewhere. If it isn't mined, it doesn't enter the market. If it doesn't enter the market, the cost of goods requiring technetium sky rocket, which should further entice groups into war.

The idea strikes me as relatively sound, but what problems do you all foresee? How do you predict this system playing out in the reality of the game?



over how much time...? and wouldn't be simpler to just have it spontaneously move to the opposite side of the galaxy from where ever the goons hold sov?

  - remove the cloaked from local; free intel is the real problem, not  "afk" cloaking -

[IMG]http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a208/DawnFrostbringer/consultsig.jpg[/IMG]

Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#258 - 2012-06-16 17:11:04 UTC
@ Dinsdale Pirannha Just shut up about how many alt accounts you've unsubbed, and try to help get a consensus on how to get moongoo rebalanced. If you can't do that then don't troll the thread with your "Eve is dieing" bullcrap, because you're not helping.

Now there seems to be two lines of thought here. One, is that a clone of PI could be used for moons. This has the advantage of the alliance having an unavoidable tax income from moons, increases the "farms and fields" dynamic by providing something that an enemy can disrupt/destroy. The disadvantage to that idea is that it is another solitary activity, that doesn't fit with the group PvE ideal CCP Soundwave wanted, also it is another structure to shoot, and who loves to shoot structures.

The second one is Ring Mining. This has the advantage of group PvE, like Soundwave wanted, increases the "farms and fields" as small roving gangs can disrupt/destroy operations as well, and it is not a structure to shoot. The disadvantages seem to be that people can avoid the refining tax if they have the resources to avoid it, causing a decrease in alliance income from large operators while simultaneously screwing over the average Joe who can't jump out to lowsec to get a lower refining tax, also since it is not a fixed structure small gangs will find it hard to catch any ring miners as intell out in 0.0 is pretty good and they would likely be reported and the miners safed up long before they ever entered the system.

Well the third thing is a band-aid fix of alchemy

"I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin

corestwo
Goonfleet Investment Banking
#259 - 2012-06-16 17:18:26 UTC
SetrakDark wrote:
Aryth wrote:
CCP quite often gets the economic side wrong, because they don't have any economic dudes. While they have an economist, knowing EVE is the #1 thing. I am hopeful that with this system they get it right. Would hate to see them get completely outmaneuvered again by a handful of market wizards.


I mean, seriously here, how much does it cost to hire an unemployed ex-finance guy in Iceland? One horned helmet? Two? Two horned helmets and a box of rotten shark meat? Let`s get serious here and talk business.

They have a finance guy. While I'm sure he's good at finance irl, the problem is that knowing IRL finance and knowing eve are two fairly distinct things. I'm sure some basic theories of finance overlap with How Eve Works (tm) but not nearly enough.

A better fit for the position as you're thinking of it would be to bring in an interested and talented player like Aryth or Weaselior. And, before you freak out about more goons in CCP, neither of them would go for it - they're just two examples of players who I know are intimately familiar with every facet of How Eve Works (tm), which is absolutely vital to a thorough familiarity with the Eve economy.

This post was crafted by a member of the GoonSwarm Federation Economic Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

fofofo

Delen Ormand
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#260 - 2012-06-16 17:35:03 UTC
Kismeteer wrote:
Personally, I'd favor a move away from the current corporation/alliance system, and have individual pilots declare their support for individual groups.

In real life, you don't walk around with the badge of your corporation on your shoulder. You walk around as yourself, and support different lists of organizations and goals. What if we made standings based on who you support/supports you, etc. And everyone are individuals that can support multiple organizations. It might be VERY chaotic at first, but I think it might be pretty interesting in the long run to see how the system stabilizes.


Insightful and original. You should defect Smile