These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Building better Worlds

First post First post First post
Author
Weaselior
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#1701 - 2014-04-25 12:53:49 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

  • All Starbase Assembly arrays now have a 5% material reduction cost for all manufacturing jobs - except for the Capital Ship Array.
  • why are you discriminating against my titans

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

    dark lollipop
    Pator Tech School
    Minmatar Republic
    #1702 - 2014-04-25 12:53:58 UTC  |  Edited by: dark lollipop
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Update!

    [list]
  • All R.A.M. and R.Db. volume has been reduced from 4m3 to 0.04m3 to accommodate for their new required numbers.
  • All Starbase Assembly arrays now have a 5% material reduction cost for all manufacturing jobs - except for the Capital Ship Array.
  • All Starbase Mobile Laboratories have a further 5% time reduction for all research jobs - except for Reverse Engineering Laboratory.
  • Blueprints that use the remote starbase feature before summer hits, but that are delivered after the summer release will automatically be moved back at the original station (not the starbase) location. This is a one-time only move to make sure current jobs are not screwed by the changes.


  • Can you please make it so manufacturing/copying from T2 BPO can only be done from a POS?

    Looks like the right time to start "removing" those from the game by letting them get blown up in POS. T2 BPO shouldnt be in game anymore, we have invention now.
    Weaselior
    GoonWaffe
    Goonswarm Federation
    #1703 - 2014-04-25 12:55:13 UTC
    also though thanks for the clarification on the in-build BPOS, that's very helpful for planning for summer

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

    LHA Tarawa
    Pator Tech School
    Minmatar Republic
    #1704 - 2014-04-25 12:57:56 UTC
    NEONOVUS wrote:
    So this has likely been asked earlier in this thread, but:
    Are the moon POSes getting the infinite slot treatment?
    Will there be NPC costs to using them?


    Yes, ALL facilities.
    YES, they will also be hit with the sliding "cost" based on usage. So, to keep your costs close to POS fuel level, you'll probably have to keep your manufacturing to a minimal level... NO details yet released on how the cost will work.

    NEONOVUS wrote:

    Will the stats on the modules be adjusted for fitting?
    Will there be new bonuses if so?
    Am I going to need the same relative logistics or will there be a new element to this aspect?


    NO details on any of this yet. Modules that used to get time bonus, will now get some discount factored into their fees. What the cost structure is going to look like is still completely unknown outside of CCP.


    I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that CCP is going to attach the fee to the moon. I doubt you'll be able to run a bunch of jobs in one structure, drive up the price, then unanchor it, re-anchor it, and poof, back to 0 cost. Or, even unanchor and reanchor the tower. My guess is you'd have to move to a new moon.

    Then again, it may end up being entire solar system. I crank out a bunch of jobs at my moon, and that jacks up the cost for all other POSes and the station. Hmmmm...

    LHA Tarawa
    Pator Tech School
    Minmatar Republic
    #1705 - 2014-04-25 13:10:49 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:

  • Blueprints that use the remote starbase feature before summer hits, but that are delivered after the summer release will automatically be moved back at the original station (not the starbase) location. This is a one-time only move to make sure current jobs are not screwed by the changes.


  • When players started pointing out that BPOs can't be locked down at a POS, therefore, corporate theft, therefore a gazillion alt corps running super hardened high sec large POS, I figured you guys would think.... I guess that little extra ISK sink that would come from 2 BPOs a year getting destroyed in a POS bash just isn't worth the incredibly painful grind this very stupid change is going to put onto industrialists.....

    I guess I was wrong. Moving forward with this change shows you really do enjoy torturing your industrialists with incredibly painful grind....
    Dinsdale Pirannha
    Pirannha Corp
    #1706 - 2014-04-25 13:12:45 UTC
    LHA Tarawa wrote:
    Flay Nardieu wrote:

    a. If a player owned station where to go into some sort of "overdrive" to handle higher density of jobs an added automatic surcharge makes sense especially since it would put more demands on line (much like overheating modules)

    b. In the case of arrays and mobile labs I see no point in making capacity scalable other than using more arrays or labs

    In either instance a "TAX" is not appropriate, in the particulars A is in player owned territory and any surcharge for exceeding capacity should be reflected in by the indication anything exceeding capacity would use more resources and require significantly more maintence and preferably an optional feature. In the instance of B capacity shouldn't be dynamic apart from adding more within the limits of what CPU and Powergrid is available to draw from. A tax applied to the production based on the demand density in a system could only be perceived as a subsidy to some 3rd (NPC) party.


    So, is your concern the word "tax"? I think CCP is calling it "cost".

    The point, seems to me, is to create ISK drains.

    CCP has been removing ISK drains from the by making more things player buildable rather than only coming from NPCs. POS fuel, POS structures, nanite repair paste.

    They need to bring back ISK drains.

    It seems they are choosing to do it by having it imbedded into the cost of all player produced items.


    The ultimate question, which of course will be met with complete silence as a response, is why the fame needs this ISK sink anyway. The latest economic report states clearly that the Eve economy is in a deflationary state.

    But now, with these huge costs being added in, we will be faced with a double whammy of less ISK to buy stuff, coupled with a price spike, at least until the cartels get their industrial warfare engine cranked up to price all the high sec manufacturers out of the game.
    Flay Nardieu
    #1707 - 2014-04-25 13:29:05 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Update!


    • All R.A.M. and R.Db. volume has been reduced from 4m3 to 0.04m3 to accommodate for their new required numbers.
    • All Starbase Assembly arrays now have a 5% material reduction cost for all manufacturing jobs - except for the Capital Ship Array.
    • All Starbase Mobile Laboratories have a further 5% time reduction for all research jobs - except for Reverse Engineering Laboratory.
    • Blueprints that use the remote starbase feature before summer hits, but that are delivered after the summer release will automatically be moved back at the original station (not the starbase) location. This is a one-time only move to make sure current jobs are not screwed by the changes.

    • Example:

    • BobTheClever installs Megathron Blueprint in Dodixie NPC station and use his corporation Starbase to research ME on it right now. Estimated delivery date is after the summer release. When he delivers the research ME job, the researched Megathorn blueprint will delivered back at the NPC station.


    R.A.M & R.Db's point definately makes sense since more will be consumed instead of them 'decaying'
    Second and 3rd points - boosts to player structures nice, still waiting on the price for it

    Final bulleted point and example: Good to know that they know changing remote jobs is gonna screw things...
    Decentralizing BP location when adding feature to run from containers is akin to look we fixed things but now we are gonna break it in different manner. I have yet to see how forcing BPs into a starbase offers anything genuinely in line with all 3 let alone 2 of the benchmarks stated for this expansion

    Quote:

    We thus needed a strong direction on how to proceed and, as such, we came up with the following set of principles:

    Any industry feature must have an actual gameplay attached to it in order to exist
    Any industry feature must be balanced around our risk versus reward philosophy
    Any industry feature must be easily understandable and visible to our player base

    (From the announcement, they where numbered 1-3 but didn't translate in copy and paste)

    I've already debunked the moving BPs to starbase premise of the #2 principle in at least two of my past posts, myself losing a print due to this change is rather unlikely it is a more of an annoyance issue and fixing something that wasn't really broke.

    I'll even throw out my own example:
    Willie Coyote Corp has 2+ starbases in a system and 1 office. WCC does different things at different starbases say 1 is research the other is production. Under current system there is no issues, the same BPO can transition from research to manufactor instantly assuming of course the array was loaded with mats. Different permissions can be used for the members who run the jobs and those who move the materials ie finished product or BPC's
    Post expansion as stated. WCC now will either have someone move the BP's for S&I guys or give them the permissions to do so themselves.

    I see the risk all too well member theft due to undermining corporate roles and controls, Reward? More corporate drama and theft. Hey guys if that is what you are promoting might as well say so up front.
    Urziel99
    Multiplex Gaming
    The Bastion
    #1708 - 2014-04-25 13:35:44 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Update!


    • All R.A.M. and R.Db. volume has been reduced from 4m3 to 0.04m3 to accommodate for their new required numbers.
    • All Starbase Assembly arrays now have a 5% material reduction cost for all manufacturing jobs - except for the Capital Ship Array.
    • All Starbase Mobile Laboratories have a further 5% time reduction for all research jobs - except for Reverse Engineering Laboratory.
    • Blueprints that use the remote starbase feature before summer hits, but that are delivered after the summer release will automatically be moved back at the original station (not the starbase) location. This is a one-time only move to make sure current jobs are not screwed by the changes.

    • Example:

    • BobTheClever installs Megathron Blueprint in Dodixie NPC station and use his corporation Starbase to research ME on it right now. Estimated delivery date is after the summer release. When he delivers the research ME job, the researched Megathorn blueprint will delivered back at the NPC station.


    Ok. I can understand the RAM change, those things could get huge in a hurry with the intended changes.

    The assembly array change is pretty meh for risking BPO's where they can't be locked down. The lab change is almost insulting barring significant changes to the base research and copy times on BPO's.
    LHA Tarawa
    Pator Tech School
    Minmatar Republic
    #1709 - 2014-04-25 13:36:26 UTC
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    The ultimate question, which of course will be met with complete silence as a response, is why the fame needs this ISK sink anyway. The latest economic report states clearly that the Eve economy is in a deflationary state.

    But now, with these huge costs being added in, we will be faced with a double whammy of less ISK to buy stuff, coupled with a price spike, at least until the cartels get their industrial warfare engine cranked up to price all the high sec manufacturers out of the game.



    I hear your concern. One of the things people tend to fail to understand about inflation is that it is not a factor of TOTAL MONEY/TOTAL GOODS. It is, in fact, a factor of only the money that is actively trying to buy goods and services.

    In the USA now, something like 80% of the wealth is owned by 10% of the population. Those 10% of the population are not actively trying to spend those trillions of dollars. They only want to loan it out, so they can earn interest on the debt and get even richer. This concentration of money into the hand of the fw is exactly why the Federal Reserve has been able to buy bonds, putting money into the hands of people, without creating inflation. The people into whose hands they are putting money, simply do not spend the money, and instead look to loan it back out.


    So, I beleive the same is happening in EVE. Money flows in through bounties, NPC buy orders of wormhole blue loot, etc. It gets spent and ends up in the hands of other players, and then other players and other players.... and eventually ends up in teh wallets of a few very rich players, coalitions, alliances.

    So, with a few individuals growing ever richer, what can be done?

    This "tax on everyone" in the form of slot fees is not, in my opinion, going to address the problem. Like sales tax (VAT) in the real world, it just takes money from people that spend it, NOT the people that do not spend it.


    Real world, the way we've been able to deal with money hoarding by the few is with a very steep income tax with large deductions for actual spending. That works. That gets the money out of the hands of the very few, insanely rich, and back flowing through the economy.

    In EVE, I a not sure how we could implement that, other than some sort of "wallet tax". 1% per month tax on your ISK balance of your personal and corporate wallets. Combine that with this slot fee to soak up the extra fee, and POOF, that is how you eliminate ISK expansion.


    Honestly, I've learned a TON about real world economics from comparing and contrasting it to EVE's economy.
    Temenus Alexander
    Alexander Enterprises
    #1710 - 2014-04-25 13:47:06 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:


    The issue regarding how to migrate blueprints using starbase when the expansion hits has been noted. We'll update this thread when we have more information about this.


    That sounds soul-crushingly like "Oh snap! We hadn't even thought about that!"
    Temenus Alexander
    Alexander Enterprises
    #1711 - 2014-04-25 13:57:57 UTC
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Max Kolonko wrote:


    Wait, what?!
    So what is my incentive to pay 300 000 000 isk a month for fuel if i still have to pay for production slots????


    Starbases will have reduced tax cost next to NPC station, and mobile labs / assembly array will have more efficient ME / PE lines.


    This. This is my primary concern with this update. This is primarily how I see it affecting me personally. I'm having a truly hard time imagining A) that NPC taxes are going to be so exhorbitant as to make 300-500M in fuel costs more cost effective or B) the efficiency being so astoundingly much greater as to justify the expense of dropping a pos as opposed to just paying even the 14%. I truly hope you guys are treading carefully here, and that we'll see the appropriate devlog ASAP.
    Max Kolonko
    Caldari Provisions
    Caldari State
    #1712 - 2014-04-25 14:00:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Max Kolonko
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Update!


    • All R.A.M. and R.Db. volume has been reduced from 4m3 to 0.04m3 to accommodate for their new required numbers.
    • All Starbase Assembly arrays now have a 5% material reduction cost for all manufacturing jobs - except for the Capital Ship Array.
    • All Starbase Mobile Laboratories have a further 5% time reduction for all research jobs - except for Reverse Engineering Laboratory.
    • Blueprints that use the remote starbase feature before summer hits, but that are delivered after the summer release will automatically be moved back at the original station (not the starbase) location. This is a one-time only move to make sure current jobs are not screwed by the changes.

    • Example:

    • BobTheClever installs Megathron Blueprint in Dodixie NPC station and use his corporation Starbase to research ME on it right now. Estimated delivery date is after the summer release. When he delivers the research ME job, the researched Megathorn blueprint will delivered back at the NPC station.



    Hmmm 5% reduction in production cost - sounds great, but this will only really affect large quantities of materials needed (i.e if something needs 1 peice of something it will not reduce the cost, so the real reduction is less.

    For me the change is nerf, as T3 production will not benefit from it at all ( only one product have 20 quantitie needed and costs 50k isk per piece, so 50k reduction on a 130 mil T3) and i will have the tax for using slots.
    Korthan Doshu
    Doomheim
    #1713 - 2014-04-25 14:12:07 UTC
    TLDR: Surely this isn't mainly about ISK sinks, it's about highsec and nullsec.

    Above posts are spot-on...we don't have inflation because the velocity of the money supply is low (Tarawa's point) and because the total volume of transactions involving goods is high and growing (output growth). This is kiddie monetarism stuff.

    An even better analysis of the EVE economy would see ISK as just another resource (albeit with some special properties) with a "bucket" model of sink and fountain. Other resources have buckets, too, though--minerals have fountains (loot, mining) and sinks (module destruction) and hoarders; salvage has fountains (exploration, PvE salvaging) and sinks (rig destruction); LP items have fountains (missions and incursions etc.) and sinks (module, implant destruction)...it goes on. We regularly trade resources between the buckets, too (ISK for minerals; sell minerals for ISK to buy rigs; etc.).

    The challenge for CCP is to do interbucket balance and intrabucket balance.

    Interbucket balance is what we're talking about when we talk about ISK inflation. But you could also talk about salvage prices coming down post-exploration as an aspect of interbucket balance. The challenge with interbucket balance is for CCP to make sure products are cheap enough for everybody to get some if they want it. Hence turning on the salvage fountain -> less valuable with respect to other buckets, including ISK -> cheaper for everybody else to use rigs. Turn on the moon goo fountain -> less valuable with respect to other buckets, especially because of an ideal diffusion of control -> cheaper for everybody else to use T2 items.

    Intrabucket balance involves making sure that the fountains and sinks inside a bucket don't destroy each other. You could criticize the exploration sites and now reprocessing changes as possibly changing the balance of salvage fountains in a way that destroys one fountain and hence one activity (salvage/loot in missions). Same deal for minerals (drone poop too much minerals -> nerf and help mining -> now help mining more by nerfing normal PvE loot drops). You could also see CCP needing to nerf incursions to give balance to other ISK fountains like L4 missions and null ratting.

    Like several people have implied, we're not having ISK price inflation; in other words, the contents of the ISK bucket are not getting that especially less valuable than other buckets right now. But we know that the bucket is getting heavier every day. That must mean that a) part of that bucket isn't in play, e.g. hoarding is acting as a kind of temporary ISK sink (Tarawa's point), and b) the other buckets are also getting heavier, e.g. more people mining in safe renter systems, etc.

    The main worry with a "heavy" bucket is thus that some of the resources in the bucket could come out of hoarding and into play to produce large shocks; imagine if some corporation with twenty trillion ISK suddenly put that in play in a minor trade hub or on a minor resource in Jita. Tarawa points out that this new ISK sink would probably NOT solve the heavy bucket problem because it would be a consumption tax, not an asset or property tax. So this main worry is hopefully not the reason CCP is making this change.

    Presumably CCP knows this and models the economy this way. So while the ISK sink benefits might be on a bullet point list somewhere, the real reason for the change is the nullsec vs. highsec issue. That's why many of the discussions of this issue involve nullsec vs. highsec (see Jester's Trek, Fiddler's Edge, Seraph, anybody...). CCP wants to make it at least plausible to make stuff in nullsec. Just like with reprocessing--if everybody has perfect refine already, how do you give a bonus?--CCP wanted to introduce a new cost that they could then alleviate as a bonus for nullsec to balance things out. We don't have the numbers yet to know how much that will act as a nerf on highsec. But at the end of the day, that is what the changes are mainly about.
    Dinsdale Pirannha
    Pirannha Corp
    #1714 - 2014-04-25 14:13:49 UTC
    LHA Tarawa wrote:
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
    The ultimate question, which of course will be met with complete silence as a response, is why the fame needs this ISK sink anyway. The latest economic report states clearly that the Eve economy is in a deflationary state.

    But now, with these huge costs being added in, we will be faced with a double whammy of less ISK to buy stuff, coupled with a price spike, at least until the cartels get their industrial warfare engine cranked up to price all the high sec manufacturers out of the game.



    I hear your concern. One of the things people tend to fail to understand about inflation is that it is not a factor of TOTAL MONEY/TOTAL GOODS. It is, in fact, a factor of only the money that is actively trying to buy goods and services.

    In the USA now, something like 80% of the wealth is owned by 10% of the population. Those 10% of the population are not actively trying to spend those trillions of dollars. They only want to loan it out, so they can earn interest on the debt and get even richer. This concentration of money into the hand of the fw is exactly why the Federal Reserve has been able to buy bonds, putting money into the hands of people, without creating inflation. The people into whose hands they are putting money, simply do not spend the money, and instead look to loan it back out.


    So, I beleive the same is happening in EVE. Money flows in through bounties, NPC buy orders of wormhole blue loot, etc. It gets spent and ends up in the hands of other players, and then other players and other players.... and eventually ends up in teh wallets of a few very rich players, coalitions, alliances.

    So, with a few individuals growing ever richer, what can be done?

    This "tax on everyone" in the form of slot fees is not, in my opinion, going to address the problem. Like sales tax (VAT) in the real world, it just takes money from people that spend it, NOT the people that do not spend it.


    Real world, the way we've been able to deal with money hoarding by the few is with a very steep income tax with large deductions for actual spending. That works. That gets the money out of the hands of the very few, insanely rich, and back flowing through the economy.

    In EVE, I a not sure how we could implement that, other than some sort of "wallet tax". 1% per month tax on your ISK balance of your personal and corporate wallets. Combine that with this slot fee to soak up the extra fee, and POOF, that is how you eliminate ISK expansion.


    Honestly, I've learned a TON about real world economics from comparing and contrasting it to EVE's economy.


    Yes, a flat tax hurts only the ones at the lower end of the economic spectrum, and this is what we are dealing with here.
    The rich get richer, the poor get poorer.

    Plus, the concept that somehow barriers to entry to being an industrialist will be lowered with these changes is just plain wrong. Sure, having more space opened up for POS's is going to allow more people to dabble in industry. But the upfront costs of building a POS are staying the same, if not going higher. And if the null sec cartel propagandists are to be believed, there was never a problem getting high sec mfg slots. But now, everyone who operates with a few jumps of a trade hub is getting hammered with huge fee increases.

    I ran an order last day for 5 run BPC from an LP store. The cost for the 39 minute job was 1219 ISK. Based on the new regime, at the 14% rate, which the system I was in will surely get hit with, the same 39 minute job will cost 91.7 million ISK, based in the in-game valuation tool of the final product's sell price. That was an increase of over 75,000 times.

    To put that in perspective, that works out to 141 million ISK per hour, per NPC mfg slot. It costs 108 million in fuel a month at present prices to run a small POS which can easily handle a couple assembly arrays. So yeah, if you can afford the upfront costs of a POS, PLUS find an open slot in the stampede (I already stated that the goons and their RvB slaves will be deadzoning entire systems by putting up small unfueled POS's, simply by using an army of alt corps), plus you can handle the risk of catastrophic BPO corp theft, a POS will be much less onerous.

    But that is NOT lowering the barrier to entry, especially when the cartels are being handed an system that encourages full-on predatory pricing to crush high sec industry.
    Flay Nardieu
    #1715 - 2014-04-25 14:20:44 UTC
    @LHA Tarawa

    It is specifically stated as a taxes

    Quote:
    Station (POS) owners will be charged parts of the running costs (taxes), other parts are outside the owners control. Total costs will never be zero. More information in an upcoming blog.
    (section of OP)


    As it has been pointed out to me every time I've made a real world comparison "Eve is not Real Life" so I have instead adopted a lore/common sense approuch to my arguements.

    Lore and common sense wise:
    NPC stations realistically could scale their S&I with the increased "burden" of course they could charge a premium to offset their "burden" same NPC stations could reasonably be in an agreement on how much the scaling surcharge would be.

    Capsuleers however are not, nor should be under an universal mandate of equity or even citizens of any given empire
    Operating costs in fuel and other resources - supported by Lore
    Requiring charters for high-sec operation (and having standings) - supported by Lore and logical
    POCO in high-sec with built in tax then corp assigned tax - supported by Lore in that empire space is controlled so to permit the continued existence of that type of orbital platform they can demand compensation

    There are already Lore associated and logical isk sinks in the game every order buy or sell has fees and or taxes, services provided only or in the majority by NPC groups and stations.

    And referencing back to quoted line from the original post, cost is never zero to begin with there are always costs and is always under some degree of control even so far as to limit production or suspend/cancel it in entirety. Some of the economic hyperboley posted by various people would have private business owners in coughing fits from laughing so hard.
    Querns
    GoonWaffe
    Goonswarm Federation
    #1716 - 2014-04-25 14:25:34 UTC
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

    Yes, a flat tax hurts only the ones at the lower end of the economic spectrum, and this is what we are dealing with here.
    The rich get richer, the poor get poorer.

    Plus, the concept that somehow barriers to entry to being an industrialist will be lowered with these changes is just plain wrong. Sure, having more space opened up for POS's is going to allow more people to dabble in industry. But the upfront costs of building a POS are staying the same, if not going higher. And if the null sec cartel propagandists are to be believed, there was never a problem getting high sec mfg slots. But now, everyone who operates with a few jumps of a trade hub is getting hammered with huge fee increases.

    I ran an order last day for 5 run BPC from an LP store. The cost for the 39 minute job was 1219 ISK. Based on the new regime, at the 14% rate, which the system I was in will surely get hit with, the same 39 minute job will cost 91.7 million ISK, based in the in-game valuation tool of the final product's sell price. That was an increase of over 75,000 times.

    To put that in perspective, that works out to 141 million ISK per hour, per NPC mfg slot. It costs 108 million in fuel a month at present prices to run a small POS which can easily handle a couple assembly arrays. So yeah, if you can afford the upfront costs of a POS, PLUS find an open slot in the stampede (I already stated that the goons and their RvB slaves will be deadzoning entire systems by putting up small unfueled POS's, simply by using an army of alt corps), plus you can handle the risk of catastrophic BPO corp theft, a POS will be much less onerous.

    But that is NOT lowering the barrier to entry, especially when the cartels are being handed an system that encourages full-on predatory pricing to crush high sec industry.

    This vignette assumes that the industrialist in question is, for some reason, unwilling to leave the trade hub. If you spread out, you will find less congested services, suffer fewer fees, and increase your margin for your diligence. This is kind of the whole point of the change.

    Also, regarding your POS spam scenario, have you stopped to consider how unfeasible that would be, even for us? 13400 moons are opening up in highsec. To tower them all with small towers at 65m per tower would cost 871 billion isk. Additionally, the supply available on the market or that can be manufactured with PI goods is maybe 1/20 of what we'd need, if that. (Mental math based on eyeballing eve-central before I head off for work, may be wrong.) We can extract a significantly better ratio of ISK to suffering by, say, burning Jita.

    This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.

    Korthan Doshu
    Doomheim
    #1717 - 2014-04-25 14:28:31 UTC
    Querns wrote:
    Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:

    Yes, a flat tax hurts only the ones at the lower end of the economic spectrum, and this is what we are dealing with here.
    The rich get richer, the poor get poorer.

    Plus, the concept that somehow barriers to entry to being an industrialist will be lowered with these changes is just plain wrong. Sure, having more space opened up for POS's is going to allow more people to dabble in industry. But the upfront costs of building a POS are staying the same, if not going higher. And if the null sec cartel propagandists are to be believed, there was never a problem getting high sec mfg slots. But now, everyone who operates with a few jumps of a trade hub is getting hammered with huge fee increases.

    I ran an order last day for 5 run BPC from an LP store. The cost for the 39 minute job was 1219 ISK. Based on the new regime, at the 14% rate, which the system I was in will surely get hit with, the same 39 minute job will cost 91.7 million ISK, based in the in-game valuation tool of the final product's sell price. That was an increase of over 75,000 times.

    To put that in perspective, that works out to 141 million ISK per hour, per NPC mfg slot. It costs 108 million in fuel a month at present prices to run a small POS which can easily handle a couple assembly arrays. So yeah, if you can afford the upfront costs of a POS, PLUS find an open slot in the stampede (I already stated that the goons and their RvB slaves will be deadzoning entire systems by putting up small unfueled POS's, simply by using an army of alt corps), plus you can handle the risk of catastrophic BPO corp theft, a POS will be much less onerous.

    But that is NOT lowering the barrier to entry, especially when the cartels are being handed an system that encourages full-on predatory pricing to crush high sec industry.

    This vignette assumes that the industrialist in question is, for some reason, unwilling to leave the trade hub. If you spread out, you will find less congested services, suffer fewer fees, and increase your margin for your diligence. This is kind of the whole point of the change.

    Also, regarding your POS spam scenario, have you stopped to consider how unfeasible that would be, even for us? 13400 moons are opening up in highsec. To tower them all with small towers at 65m per tower would cost 871 billion isk. Additionally, the supply available on the market or that can be manufactured with PI goods is maybe 1/20 of what we'd need, if that. (Mental math based on eyeballing eve-central before I head off for work, may be wrong.) We can extract a significantly better ratio of ISK to suffering by, say, burning Jita.


    Just depends on how quickly the formula scales up, right? If it only takes ten items to get to max or if POSs contribute to systemwide congestion, things get much hairier for today's solo indy alt corp people. We just need to see numbers to see whether this is nullsec-highsec balance or a highsec nerf.
    Destiven Mare
    Ghost Net Industrialists
    Valkyrie Alliance
    #1718 - 2014-04-25 14:44:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Destiven Mare
    A significant number of subscribers are clamoring for a dev blog in this series and instead CCP issues a fluff piece on one of their own??!!

    http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/developer-spotlight-goliath/

    I have zero issue with Goliath; I am curious to know whether this "dev blog" is a calculated move on CCP's part to further inflame industrialists or just more evidence of an utterly and absurdly inept PR department inside CCP.
    Soldarius
    Dreddit
    Test Alliance Please Ignore
    #1719 - 2014-04-25 14:58:52 UTC
    I have another question for CCP.

    Will the anchoring of POSes in 0.8-1.0 systems extend to other anchorables as well, or is it just for POSes and their associated modules?

    http://youtu.be/YVkUvmDQ3HY

    Querns
    GoonWaffe
    Goonswarm Federation
    #1720 - 2014-04-25 15:05:03 UTC
    Korthan Doshu wrote:

    Just depends on how quickly the formula scales up, right? If it only takes ten items to get to max or if POSs contribute to systemwide congestion, things get much hairier for today's solo indy alt corp people. We just need to see numbers to see whether this is nullsec-highsec balance or a highsec nerf.

    Yeah, I don't know the formula so it's hard to say how available 0% congestion manufacturing stations will be. Frankly, that's not the RAM type I'd be worried about -- it's copying that is probably gonna be the pisser. Manufacturing slots are just not that rare; I regularly run jobs 1-2j from Jita once a month or less, and I never have problems finding open slots today. Granted, this is not the BEST comparison, but it speaks to the prevalence of manufacturing facilities and its general demand. With the removal of remote copying at a POS, copy stations and offices are gonna be in high demand in highsec. I expect congestion to creep up pretty quick on those.

    One thing's for sure though -- people with balls of steel who are willing to toss expensive BPOs into a POS to copy or do materials research are gonna get paid. Well, until someone finds their pos, I guess. Risk vs reward is a wonderful thing.

    This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.