These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Market Discussions

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
Previous page123Next page
 

Implications for the proposed Technetium changes.

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Mortimer Civeri
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#21 - 2012-07-23 23:44:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Mortimer Civeri
Airto TLA wrote:
Tech is the current bottleneck, hence ints high price, bottleneck normally indicates that excess demand for the product exists, the question is how much supply would be required until price falls back to production cost plus a resonable profit.

The person who mentioned that there are 400 tech moons, blah ... blah, blah. That does not matter it would problay only require a few dozen tech moons worth of output to in efffect cap the the price of tech.

Right now the 20:1 price would break the cartel benefit, but would still leave the tech moon lords very rich. 10:1 would be a a inconviance and may require a new source of income for the gonnies, 5:1 could inpotenial be game changing as tech more than halves and it could fall more since supplies may be high enough that a new botleneck forms (not likely, but possible).

Do you seriously believe that Goons would be inconvenienced by the Tech nerf? Ever since they got Dek, and figured out how screwed up the Tech bottleneck was, they probably have been hashing out how to keep going when CCP "finally fix tech".

EDIT: price floors for various ratios (absolutely no profit at all)

20:1 105k ISK/unit

10:1 52.5k ISK/unit

5:1 26.25k ISK/unit

The cartel can just set the price to the ratio floor and take less profit, while still making alchemy unprofitable. Really how dense are you

"I don't know which is worse, ...that everyone has his price, or that the price is always so low." Calvin
Ravenclaw2kk
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#22 - 2012-07-24 10:25:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Ravenclaw2kk
Mortimer Civeri wrote:
Airto TLA wrote:
Tech is the current bottleneck, hence ints high price, bottleneck normally indicates that excess demand for the product exists, the question is how much supply would be required until price falls back to production cost plus a resonable profit.

The person who mentioned that there are 400 tech moons, blah ... blah, blah. That does not matter it would problay only require a few dozen tech moons worth of output to in efffect cap the the price of tech.

Right now the 20:1 price would break the cartel benefit, but would still leave the tech moon lords very rich. 10:1 would be a a inconviance and may require a new source of income for the gonnies, 5:1 could inpotenial be game changing as tech more than halves and it could fall more since supplies may be high enough that a new botleneck forms (not likely, but possible).

Do you seriously believe that Goons would be inconvenienced by the Tech nerf? Ever since they got Dek, and figured out how screwed up the Tech bottleneck was, they probably have been hashing out how to keep going when CCP "finally fix tech".

EDIT: price floors for various ratios (absolutely no profit at all)

20:1 105k ISK/unit

10:1 52.5k ISK/unit

5:1 26.25k ISK/unit

The cartel can just set the price to the ratio floor and take less profit, while still making alchemy unprofitable. Really how dense are you




That would be true if the future market was dependent on supply (as it is now). Reduce the price and increase the demand. CCP are trying to change the market by reducing the bottleneck by making the market more demand driven. I am pretty terribad at markets, but even i understand that much.

Now one thing the goons could do, would be to release their stockpile at minimum prices and in the meantime buy up cheap cobalt. When their supply finally runs dry cobalt would go up and goons could profit.
Moonlit Raid
Doomheim
#23 - 2012-07-24 12:15:19 UTC
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:
Assuming this patch goes through as currently laid out what will the wider implications be?

It seems obvious that new reactants for Platinum Technite should gain some value for those brave enough to speculate, but what about the indirect change, considering the entire T2 market is largely affected by tech prices what kind of changes can we expect?

Many T2 products are dominated my the mineral costs or invention costs (Guns, T2 Siege / Triage, modules)

However things like ships which take a very large volume of tech compared to other minerals and invention costs could see a huge price drop.


Can we expect JFs, T2 BS, CS and T2 cruisers to take a large hit due to the reduced costs? Also the affected T2 BPOs should lose some build value (not collectors) due to invention being a close alternative.

What kind of prices can we expect for these ships or other items dominated by tech price? Will we see 4bn Jump freighters again? or 100m HACs?

How do I invent a Tech 2 BPO?

If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.

Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.
Trader Horizon
Novartis Industries
Brack Regen
#24 - 2012-07-24 13:34:51 UTC
Moonlit Raid wrote:
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:
Assuming this patch goes through as currently laid out what will the wider implications be?

It seems obvious that new reactants for Platinum Technite should gain some value for those brave enough to speculate, but what about the indirect change, considering the entire T2 market is largely affected by tech prices what kind of changes can we expect?

Many T2 products are dominated my the mineral costs or invention costs (Guns, T2 Siege / Triage, modules)

However things like ships which take a very large volume of tech compared to other minerals and invention costs could see a huge price drop.


Can we expect JFs, T2 BS, CS and T2 cruisers to take a large hit due to the reduced costs? Also the affected T2 BPOs should lose some build value (not collectors) due to invention being a close alternative.

What kind of prices can we expect for these ships or other items dominated by tech price? Will we see 4bn Jump freighters again? or 100m HACs?

How do I invent a Tech 2 BPO?


I cant tell if thats a troll or just stupidity....
Cebraio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#25 - 2012-07-24 13:40:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Cebraio
Trader Horizon wrote:
Moonlit Raid wrote:
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:
Assuming this patch goes through as currently laid out what will the wider implications be?

It seems obvious that new reactants for Platinum Technite should gain some value for those brave enough to speculate, but what about the indirect change, considering the entire T2 market is largely affected by tech prices what kind of changes can we expect?

Many T2 products are dominated my the mineral costs or invention costs (Guns, T2 Siege / Triage, modules)

However things like ships which take a very large volume of tech compared to other minerals and invention costs could see a huge price drop.


Can we expect JFs, T2 BS, CS and T2 cruisers to take a large hit due to the reduced costs? Also the affected T2 BPOs should lose some build value (not collectors) due to invention being a close alternative.

What kind of prices can we expect for these ships or other items dominated by tech price? Will we see 4bn Jump freighters again? or 100m HACs?

How do I invent a Tech 2 BPO?


I cant tell if thats a troll or just stupidity....


It's a legitimate question. Although one that is better answered by a quick google search and some reading through guides and wikis. See this one for example: http://eve.wikia.com/wiki/Invention

Edit: To clarify: This is about BPCs, T2 BPOs cannot be invented.
CCP Fozzie
C C P
C C P Alliance
#26 - 2012-07-24 16:06:30 UTC
Bumping with an update to the plan

After evaluating the market reactions and the estimates from experienced players we now feel comfortable accelerating our planned implementation these reactions. We're going to have them start at 10/1 ratios and re-evaluate from there.

New versions of the reactions are:

- 100 Titanium + 100 Vanadium -> 1 Unrefined Vanadium Hafnite -> 20 Vanadium Hafnite +  90 Vanadium
- 100 Cobalt + 100 Platinum -> 1 Unrefined Platinum Technite -> 20 Platinum Technite + 90 Platinum
- 100 Scandium + 100 Chromium -> 1 Unrefined Solerium -> 20 Solerium + 90 Chromium
- 100 Scandium + 100 Cadmium -> 1 Unrefined Caesarium Cadmide -> 20 Caesarium Cadmide + 90 Cadmium

- 100 Evaporite Deposits + 100 Atmospheric Gases -> 1 Unrefined Hexite -> 20 Hexite

- 100 Atmospheric Gases + 100 Tungsten -> 1 Unrefined Rolled Tungsten Alloy -> 20 Rolled Tungsten Alloy + 90 Tungsten 
- 100 Evaporite Deposits + 100 Titanium -> 1 Unrefined Titanium Chromide -> 20 Titanium Chromide + 90 Titanium
- 100 Hydrocarbons + 100 Scandium -> 1 Unrefined Fernite Alloy-> 20 Fernite Alloy + 90 Scandium
- 100 Silicates + 100 Cobalt -> 1 Unrefined Crystallite Alloy -> 20 Crystallite Alloy + 90 Cobalt

Game Designer | Team Five-0

Twitter: @CCP_Fozzie
Twitch chat: ccp_fozzie
Airto TLA
Acorn's Wonder Bars
#27 - 2012-07-24 16:26:10 UTC
Mortimer Civeri wrote:
Airto TLA wrote:
Tech is the current bottleneck, hence ints high price, bottleneck normally indicates that excess demand for the product exists, the question is how much supply would be required until price falls back to production cost plus a resonable profit.

The person who mentioned that there are 400 tech moons, blah ... blah, blah. That does not matter it would problay only require a few dozen tech moons worth of output to in efffect cap the the price of tech.

Right now the 20:1 price would break the cartel benefit, but would still leave the tech moon lords very rich. 10:1 would be a a inconviance and may require a new source of income for the gonnies, 5:1 could inpotenial be game changing as tech more than halves and it could fall more since supplies may be high enough that a new botleneck forms (not likely, but possible).

Do you seriously believe that Goons would be inconvenienced by the Tech nerf? Ever since they got Dek, and figured out how screwed up the Tech bottleneck was, they probably have been hashing out how to keep going when CCP "finally fix tech".

EDIT: price floors for various ratios (absolutely no profit at all)

20:1 105k ISK/unit

10:1 52.5k ISK/unit

5:1 26.25k ISK/unit

The cartel can just set the price to the ratio floor and take less profit, while still making alchemy unprofitable. Really how dense are you


Gee Thanks for the insult when you basically agree with me, as soon as the cartel is forced to reset its price to remove a competing product it IS NO LONGER A CARTEL, as I mentioned the 20:1 was minimal impact, 10:1 (apperently the actual number), means the printing press is closed the Tech lords will not be able to support a price above 60-70k, still a good deal, but not the instant win situation we currently have. I assume a higher than minimum price since as tech falls the units demand will actually go UP, and the cobalt alchemy will be needed to provide the required new units.

If you believe a 50-70% drop in revenue (drop in profit will be higher) is not sigificant, cant help you.

The only question right now is can the goons hold enough Cobalt off the market to maintain their cartel. (not a moon mineral geography expert). YOu would be amazed how little real production coming on the market at a below cartel price it takes to force lower prices (this is from real world studies of the "cheaters in OPEC")
Moonlit Raid
Doomheim
#28 - 2012-07-24 16:56:16 UTC
Cebraio wrote:
Trader Horizon wrote:
Moonlit Raid wrote:
IHaveCandyGetInTheVan69 wrote:
Assuming this patch goes through as currently laid out what will the wider implications be?

It seems obvious that new reactants for Platinum Technite should gain some value for those brave enough to speculate, but what about the indirect change, considering the entire T2 market is largely affected by tech prices what kind of changes can we expect?

Many T2 products are dominated my the mineral costs or invention costs (Guns, T2 Siege / Triage, modules)

However things like ships which take a very large volume of tech compared to other minerals and invention costs could see a huge price drop.


Can we expect JFs, T2 BS, CS and T2 cruisers to take a large hit due to the reduced costs? Also the affected T2 BPOs should lose some build value (not collectors) due to invention being a close alternative.

What kind of prices can we expect for these ships or other items dominated by tech price? Will we see 4bn Jump freighters again? or 100m HACs?

How do I invent a Tech 2 BPO?


I cant tell if thats a troll or just stupidity....


It's a legitimate question. Although one that is better answered by a quick google search and some reading through guides and wikis. See this one for example: http://eve.wikia.com/wiki/Invention

Edit: To clarify: This is about BPCs, T2 BPOs cannot be invented.

So why not have minimal chance of creating tech 2 bpo, higher chance of inventing tech 2 bpc. Before inventing make your choice, you only get one.

If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.

Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.
Kailean
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#29 - 2012-07-24 16:59:25 UTC
T2 BPOs were removed* for a reason.

*That is, the option of getting new ones; the old ones are still in game.
XavierVE
No Corporation for Old Spacemen
#30 - 2012-07-24 19:40:31 UTC  |  Edited by: XavierVE
People keep saying "At current fuel prices" as if the current ridiculous high of POS fuel costs is going to be maintained. The perma-hulkageddon hit ice miners harder than any other mining group, since macks were so easy to gank.

I suggest people check the Inferno 1.2 patch notes, heh. Fuel costs are going to deflate to levels not seen in a long, long time. The entire economy is headed for an extreme deflationary cycle.
Renan Ruivo
Forcas armadas
Brave Collective
#31 - 2012-07-24 20:12:09 UTC
XavierVE wrote:
[...]The entire economy is headed for an extreme deflationary cycle.


If only ...

The world is a community of idiots doing a series of things until it explodes and we all die.
Captain CarlCosmogasm
Cosmogasm
#32 - 2012-07-24 20:59:59 UTC
Considering Fozie's new alchemy ratio and roughly speaking, if we replaced all the production demand on technetium with cobalt the demand on cobalt would increase between 50 to 100 times.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#33 - 2012-07-24 21:31:40 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Bumping with an update to the plan

After evaluating the market reactions and the estimates from experienced players we now feel comfortable accelerating our planned implementation these reactions. We're going to have them start at 10/1 ratios and re-evaluate from there.

New versions of the reactions are:

- 100 Titanium + 100 Vanadium -> 1 Unrefined Vanadium Hafnite -> 20 Vanadium Hafnite +  90 Vanadium
- 100 Cobalt + 100 Platinum -> 1 Unrefined Platinum Technite -> 20 Platinum Technite + 90 Platinum
- 100 Scandium + 100 Chromium -> 1 Unrefined Solerium -> 20 Solerium + 90 Chromium
- 100 Scandium + 100 Cadmium -> 1 Unrefined Caesarium Cadmide -> 20 Caesarium Cadmide + 90 Cadmium

- 100 Evaporite Deposits + 100 Atmospheric Gases -> 1 Unrefined Hexite -> 20 Hexite

- 100 Atmospheric Gases + 100 Tungsten -> 1 Unrefined Rolled Tungsten Alloy -> 20 Rolled Tungsten Alloy + 90 Tungsten 
- 100 Evaporite Deposits + 100 Titanium -> 1 Unrefined Titanium Chromide -> 20 Titanium Chromide + 90 Titanium
- 100 Hydrocarbons + 100 Scandium -> 1 Unrefined Fernite Alloy-> 20 Fernite Alloy + 90 Scandium
- 100 Silicates + 100 Cobalt -> 1 Unrefined Crystallite Alloy -> 20 Crystallite Alloy + 90 Cobalt


Nobody else of those interested by your work told a "thank you".

So I, not impacted by these changes, I take the opportunity to thank you by myself for your knowledge sharing effort!

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
TheSmokingHertog
Julia's Interstellar Trade Emperium
#34 - 2012-07-25 00:34:00 UTC
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Bumping with an update to the plan

After evaluating the market reactions and the estimates from experienced players we now feel comfortable accelerating our planned implementation these reactions. We're going to have them start at 10/1 ratios and re-evaluate from there.

New versions of the reactions are:

- 100 Titanium + 100 Vanadium -> 1 Unrefined Vanadium Hafnite -> 20 Vanadium Hafnite +  90 Vanadium
- 100 Cobalt + 100 Platinum -> 1 Unrefined Platinum Technite -> 20 Platinum Technite + 90 Platinum
- 100 Scandium + 100 Chromium -> 1 Unrefined Solerium -> 20 Solerium + 90 Chromium
- 100 Scandium + 100 Cadmium -> 1 Unrefined Caesarium Cadmide -> 20 Caesarium Cadmide + 90 Cadmium

- 100 Evaporite Deposits + 100 Atmospheric Gases -> 1 Unrefined Hexite -> 20 Hexite

- 100 Atmospheric Gases + 100 Tungsten -> 1 Unrefined Rolled Tungsten Alloy -> 20 Rolled Tungsten Alloy + 90 Tungsten 
- 100 Evaporite Deposits + 100 Titanium -> 1 Unrefined Titanium Chromide -> 20 Titanium Chromide + 90 Titanium
- 100 Hydrocarbons + 100 Scandium -> 1 Unrefined Fernite Alloy-> 20 Fernite Alloy + 90 Scandium
- 100 Silicates + 100 Cobalt -> 1 Unrefined Crystallite Alloy -> 20 Crystallite Alloy + 90 Cobalt


Great information, posted a link to your post in the Inferno 1.2 thread, so more people can pick up on this. Chrz.

"Dogma is kind of like quantum physics, observing the dogma state will change it." ~ CCP Prism X

"Schrödinger's Missile. I dig it." ~ Makari Aeron

-= "Brain in a Box on Singularity" - April 2015 =-
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
#35 - 2012-07-25 01:08:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Akita T
So, new estimated tech prices:
- at an absolute absurd minimum around 50k (based on "everything I get myself is almost free and my time is barely worth anything" calcs),
- close to maximum around 90k (ingredients at halfway decent value and also plenty of alchemy reaction profitability to make wide adoption likely),
- most likely settling somewhere around 75k-85k before any further changes, a bit higher than the midpoint based on the idea that volume demand for T2 items will also pick up due to lowered prices

Let's call that tech going down to about 80k per unit soon.
That's a nice value, lower than its value for most of this year so far, but not by much.
Closer to the situation about a year and a half, maybe two years ago.
Decent enough, for now, I guess.

Akita T evewiki profile | | | Build your own EVE-ready PC
Vexx Dmor
Trans Suns Mining
#36 - 2012-07-25 02:46:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Vexx Dmor
Hi all, new to this forum (not to the game) and just planted a tower on cobalt, then stumbled over this forum. Small trader / builder in game with some RL market experience, 11 yrs broker in equities, some options, but not much in RL commodities.

Was curious what thoughts were on the new mining boats with durability upgrades vs ganks etc. Would these allow for increased fuel supply hence lower the fuel costs on blocks? Wondering whether to secure a blocks supply now or wait.
Kara Books
Deal with IT.
#37 - 2012-07-25 03:01:45 UTC
The introduction of "Crafting" on a rather large scale is a major milestone eve online will be passing, its about time.

I wounder, if the goon leadership money makers are as surprised as myself about the direction of the game or have they already planned on more then just, making a push into hulkageddon to decimate the ice miners as soon as the changes hit?

What else would I do if I where them...

Assuming that the logical step right now is to crash every aspect of the market to troll, shed tears and trying to destroy a game, you know the drill, they would have to accept defeat at the hands of CCP.

Its only a matter of choice, weather they want to fight CCP for the WIN, to the end go down gloriously OR, take the logical steps, crashing the market back to yesteryear, accept defeat, draw Oil tanker loads of tears and walk away with every last penny.


Greed or Glory.
Ohh Yeah
Jerkasaurus Wrecks Inc.
Sedition.
#38 - 2012-07-25 04:36:58 UTC
Vexx Dmor wrote:
Hi all, new to this forum (not to the game) and just planted a tower on cobalt, then stumbled over this forum. Small trader / builder in game with some RL market experience, 11 yrs broker in equities, some options, but not much in RL commodities.

Was curious what thoughts were on the new mining boats with durability upgrades vs ganks etc. Would these allow for increased fuel supply hence lower the fuel costs on blocks? Wondering whether to secure a blocks supply now or wait.


New barges won't make much of a difference

If tons of people try doing alchemy, fuel prices will actually go up.
Hemmo Paskiainen
#39 - 2012-07-25 06:43:20 UTC
I seriously hope that their will be some significant changes in maths on t2 ships aswell. If these alchemy changes are implementrd with nothing else, their will come a hugh shitstorm of public image damage... If tech indeed would stable around 80k isk, than their will be lots of ppl yelling ccp is favouring the current otech holders as a hugh prob just get a lityle smaller instead of actualy solved.

If relativity equals time plus momentum, what equals relativity, if the momentum is minus to the time?
Captain CarlCosmogasm
Cosmogasm
#40 - 2012-07-25 07:24:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain CarlCosmogasm
if cobalt stays around 2.5k - 5k and supplies the new demand to allegedly be placed upon it, technetium will drop to between 25k - 35k; HACs will be around the 100 million mark.

If cobalt goes crazy then flying Gallente will suck.

Then again, maybe I'm an idiot.
Previous page123Next page