These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New dev blog: Tech is fine l2p

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#381 - 2012-07-19 21:10:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
yeah, if mining raw cobalt and platinum is only slightly less proftable then transmuting them to Technetium, that means alchemy+ at razor-slim profit margins is barely more efficient then technetium trade which is saddled by a markup of thousands of percentage. which means this solves very little except capping tech prices at their present value which CCP Fozzy described as "broken".
Jarnis McPieksu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#382 - 2012-07-19 21:11:33 UTC
Kosmoto Gothwen wrote:
First off glad this is all getting looked at.

I wanted to show some real numbers to the profitability of this:
Cobalt 100 x 24 x 7 = 16,800 = approx 128,100,000isk/wk
Platinum 100 x 24 x 7 = 16,800 = approx 106,476,552isk/wk
128,100,000isk + 106,476,552isk = 234,576,522isk/wk

Produces Platinum Technite which refines into
Platinum Technite 10/hr x 24hrs x 7days = 1,680units = approx 176,566,303.20isk/wk
Platinum 95/hr x 24hrs x 7days = 15,960 = approx 101,184,644.40isk/wk
Output value per wk = 277,750,947.60isk

Approx Large Tower fuel cost = 147,840,000isk/wk
Approx Medium Tower fuel cost = 73,920,000isk/wk

Profits
Large Tower = 277,750,947.60 - 147,840,000 = 129,910,947.60isk/wk
Medium Tower = 277,750,947.60 - 147,840,000 = 203,830,947.60isk/wk

So the above isk values are based on current Jita avg sell prices via eve-central. (Not worth nit picking isk prices when dealing with this size of numbers, and values fluctuate). Also I'm assuming your doing this on a single tower, it's doable but to get both resources on a single moon isn't likely, so you probably end up with multiple POS's or shipping one of the resources in, either way it would cut into the profit margin. As you can see at currently inflated market values it would be marginally profitable to do this reaction but if PlatTech went down it wouldn't be worth doing any more. Even at these numbers the risk is moderately high considering you have a billion isk POS set up (including fuel) to do this.


No.

Your math is broken. Assuming the weekly input and output values and fuel costs are correct (I can't be bothered to verify right now), it would cost. 235M (input cost)+74M (fuel cost, med tower running one of these reactions. large could do two at twice the fuel cost, no real change for this)= 309M per week to produce stuff that sells for 278M. For a fat loss of 31M per week.

You could also simplify the math by not counting any output Platinum and just price in 5 units/cycle and just shave off 100M per week from input and output. It won't change the total; 209M costs, 178M sale price of output.

The only way this dev blog makes any sense is that it is actually a bait-and-switch. They have every intention of using the normal alchemy ratios instead of 20/1 but won't disclose that just yet. At 5/1 ratio you would get 4 times as much platinum technite with the same inputs, making this very profitable at current prices, which obviously wouldn't last for very long.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#383 - 2012-07-19 21:13:08 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
yeah, if mining raw cobalt and platinum is only slightly less proftable then transmuting them to Technetium, that means alchemy+ at razor-slim profit margins is barely more efficient then technetium trade which is saddled by a markup of thousands of percentage. which means this solves very little except capping tech prices at their present value which CCP Fozzy described as "broken".


Much like your alliances push a few months ago to go harass towers, you just don't get it.

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
EvilweaselSA
GoonCorp
Goonswarm Federation
#384 - 2012-07-19 21:14:14 UTC
stop using 8k as the price for cobalt you idiots
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#385 - 2012-07-19 21:17:40 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
yeah, if mining raw cobalt and platinum is only slightly less proftable then transmuting them to Technetium, that means alchemy+ at razor-slim profit margins is barely more efficient then technetium trade which is saddled by a markup of thousands of percentage. which means this solves very little except capping tech prices at their present value which CCP Fozzy described as "broken".


Much like your alliances push a few months ago to go harass towers, you just don't get it.

Whether it's some POS push my alliance never participated in or some posting fee that doesn't exist, keeping track of the incoherent hallucinations ("Vibrant drone regions") you assert as reality is difficult to follow. You're to credibility what MeBiatch is to spelling.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#386 - 2012-07-19 21:17:52 UTC
Grath Telkin wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
yeah, if mining raw cobalt and platinum is only slightly less proftable then transmuting them to Technetium, that means alchemy+ at razor-slim profit margins is barely more efficient then technetium trade which is saddled by a markup of thousands of percentage. which means this solves very little except capping tech prices at their present value which CCP Fozzy described as "broken".


Much like your alliances push a few months ago to go harass towers, you just don't get it.


so nico turned down your bro love offer too eh?

wow grath you keep on getting rejected...

no wonder you are soo bitter...

but alas worry not...

i still lub youRoll

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#387 - 2012-07-19 21:18:57 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
yeah, if mining raw cobalt and platinum is only slightly less proftable then transmuting them to Technetium, that means alchemy+ at razor-slim profit margins is barely more efficient then technetium trade which is saddled by a markup of thousands of percentage. which means this solves very little except capping tech prices at their present value which CCP Fozzy described as "broken".


Much like your alliances push a few months ago to go harass towers, you just don't get it.


so nico turned down your bro love offer too eh?

wow grath you keep on getting rejected...

no wonder you are soo bitter...

but alas worry not...

i still lub youRoll

Actually, the bropact seems to be pretty much alive and kicking at this point.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
Jarnis McPieksu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#388 - 2012-07-19 21:21:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Jarnis McPieksu
EvilweaselSA wrote:
stop using 8k as the price for cobalt you idiots


I haven't logged in much so I don't know what the price is, I just tried to point out that the poster who quoted those prices couldn't do simple math.

I still doubt that at 20/1 ratio the reaction will be useful. You'd need a massive farm of towers (which take :effort: to run) to get any real quantity of stuff to sell so profit percentage isn't everything; I wouldn't play around with billions of tower hardware at risk for a few hundred million a month. Why not run complex reactions instead?

Now if they suddenly bait-and-switch it from 20/1 ratio to the 5/1 all the other alchemy reactions nowdays use, math changes considerably (just don't plan on doing it for long periods of time, OTEC will just cut the Tech price to a point where alchemy again becomes almost pointless and carries on)

General rule: Alchemy is never profitable and that is working as intended. It is just a theoretical price cap. If it looks like an alchemy reaction is actually profitable, either you are bad at math or something is seriously out of whack with the market
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#389 - 2012-07-19 21:23:10 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
yeah, if mining raw cobalt and platinum is only slightly less proftable then transmuting them to Technetium, that means alchemy+ at razor-slim profit margins is barely more efficient then technetium trade which is saddled by a markup of thousands of percentage. which means this solves very little except capping tech prices at their present value which CCP Fozzy described as "broken".


Much like your alliances push a few months ago to go harass towers, you just don't get it.

Whether it's some POS push my alliance never participated in or some posting fee that doesn't exist, keeping track of the incoherent hallucinations ("Vibrant drone regions") you assert as reality is difficult to follow. You're to credibility what MeBiatch is to spelling.


wow i am famous!

some people say the glass is half fulll... some say half empty...

i say its always full just the other half is with air...

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
MeBiatch
GRR GOONS
#390 - 2012-07-19 21:29:28 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
yeah, if mining raw cobalt and platinum is only slightly less proftable then transmuting them to Technetium, that means alchemy+ at razor-slim profit margins is barely more efficient then technetium trade which is saddled by a markup of thousands of percentage. which means this solves very little except capping tech prices at their present value which CCP Fozzy described as "broken".



cant you just do pi stuff and gas mining so that runing a pos is free? plus free moon goo means its all free

There are no stupid Questions... just stupid people... CCP Goliath wrote:

Ugh ti-di pooping makes me sad.
Jarnis McPieksu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#391 - 2012-07-19 21:33:35 UTC
MeBiatch wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
yeah, if mining raw cobalt and platinum is only slightly less proftable then transmuting them to Technetium, that means alchemy+ at razor-slim profit margins is barely more efficient then technetium trade which is saddled by a markup of thousands of percentage. which means this solves very little except capping tech prices at their present value which CCP Fozzy described as "broken".



cant you just do pi stuff and gas mining so that runing a pos is free? plus free moon goo means its all free


OMG, you found the secret how to make billions of ISK. Just mine ice, do PI, mine moons then use all that to run reactions and sell it all and... ALL FREE*.

*May require ridiculous amounts of play time to "work in the salt mines" to save few peanuts on some of the raw materials
Tairon Usaro
G-Fleet Alpha
#392 - 2012-07-19 21:34:13 UTC
like the change !

OTEC was fun for a while ... but its certainly a gamebreaker if it stayed any longer

On the other side, i think it's wrong to take out passive alliance money sources. This is what we fight for.
Small scale ganking of Miners (in essence thats, what you want us to be, when it comes to ring mining) is fun for a while, but it's not fuelling epic wars that last over month.
So keep moon goo with alchemy "pressure valves" and dont try replace passive alliance money by active miner money, it wont work this way, but will damage the 0.0 alliance content.

I dont mind, if ring mining is going to be an addition, but it should not be a substitution.
Grath Telkin
Amok.
Goonswarm Federation
#393 - 2012-07-19 21:35:23 UTC  |  Edited by: Grath Telkin
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
yeah, if mining raw cobalt and platinum is only slightly less proftable then transmuting them to Technetium, that means alchemy+ at razor-slim profit margins is barely more efficient then technetium trade which is saddled by a markup of thousands of percentage. which means this solves very little except capping tech prices at their present value which CCP Fozzy described as "broken".


Much like your alliances push a few months ago to go harass towers, you just don't get it.

Whether it's some POS push my alliance never participated in or some posting fee that doesn't exist, keeping track of the incoherent hallucinations ("Vibrant drone regions") you assert as reality is difficult to follow. You're to credibility what MeBiatch is to spelling.


So you're saying that FAIL didn't deploy north to "harass" tech moons and then not manage to do a single thing for 3 weeks, then pack up and go home?

I mean, if it wont get moderated out i can post every alliance meeting and mail you've had in your little gutter dwelling scrub alliance for the past 6 months, or even better your alliance meeting that literally everybody in EVE's 0.0 population has sat around laughing about from last weekend where you fine gentlemen discussed all the fines that are levied from talking in local and forum posting.

Oh hey look heres one now:
Quote:
Re: DO NOT TALK IN LOCAL
From: Archіebаld Hornby
Sent: 2012.06.28 14:15
To: Caѕcade Imminent

From now on an increasing fine goes to anyone saying anything but GF in local when neuts are present.
1st offense : 50m
2nd offense : 250m
3rd offense : 800m

If anyone sees anyone doing this mail GAGS Pevi a picture

-Archie


Yea, totally sounds like I'm making things up

Man your alliance sure does sound like fun, being told when you're allowed to talk and where sure is the pinnacle of videogame fun!

Malcanis - Without drone assign, the slowcat doctrine will wither and die.
Teclador
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#394 - 2012-07-19 21:35:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Teclador
CCP Fozzie wrote:
Wocka Wocka!

Remember that if you like this change you should hit the "like" button on this post. I need to know if this is the kind of work the community is looking for. ;)


I'm still missing the Dislike Button.

If you really want to know Real Numbers, then you have to add a Dislike Button.

It's the same Mistake you are doing here, you (CCP) have done with the Unified Inventory, i'm still waiting to get the Old Inventory Back, but Beside the new one.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#395 - 2012-07-19 21:39:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Nicolo da'Vicenza
Grath Telkin wrote:
Yea, totally sounds like I'm making things up

Yea it kind of does when you claim that "forum posting results in a fine" and post an unrelated e-mail about forbidding in-game chat in local. You see Grath, this is an internet browser, not an in-game EVE channel
hth
Lord Zim
Gallente Federation
#396 - 2012-07-19 21:40:08 UTC
So not even good porn to share with your adversaries after a good spacefuck?

Nicolo, I am disappointed.

Cyno's lit, bridge is up, but one pilot won't be jumping home.

RIP Vile Rat
PinkKnife
The Cuddlefish
Ethereal Dawn
#397 - 2012-07-19 21:41:20 UTC
Jarnis McPieksu wrote:


The only way this dev blog makes any sense is that it is actually a bait-and-switch. They have every intention of using the normal alchemy ratios instead of 20/1 but won't disclose that just yet. At 5/1 ratio you would get 4 times as much platinum technite with the same inputs, making this very profitable at current prices, which obviously wouldn't last for very long.



This is why the smart money is investing in Pos towers, silos, and reaction arrays.
Nicolo da'Vicenza
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#398 - 2012-07-19 21:46:09 UTC
Lord Zim wrote:
So not even good **** to share with your adversaries after a good spacefuck?

Nicolo, I am disappointed.

no local chat is what makes us elite, like those masked sandninjas in 300
Jarnis McPieksu
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#399 - 2012-07-19 21:51:01 UTC
PinkKnife wrote:
Jarnis McPieksu wrote:


The only way this dev blog makes any sense is that it is actually a bait-and-switch. They have every intention of using the normal alchemy ratios instead of 20/1 but won't disclose that just yet. At 5/1 ratio you would get 4 times as much platinum technite with the same inputs, making this very profitable at current prices, which obviously wouldn't last for very long.



This is why the smart money is investing in Pos towers, silos, and reaction arrays.


...and POS fuel. Large chunk of the sale price of alchemy-reacted plat technite is actually POS fuel.

Caldari/Gallente fuel block / isotope price spike speculation inc.
Vera Algaert
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#400 - 2012-07-19 22:01:21 UTC
Nicolo da'Vicenza wrote:
Grath Telkin wrote:
Yea, totally sounds like I'm making things up

Yea it kind of does when you claim that "forum posting results in a fine" and post an unrelated e-mail about forbidding in-game chat in local. You see Grath, this is an internet browser, not an in-game EVE channel
hth

he only beats me on Saturdays!

.