These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey] Tech 1 Battleships - Build Costs

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
mynnna
State War Academy
Caldari State
#121 - 2013-05-03 20:40:36 UTC
Cultural Enrichment wrote:
progodlegend wrote:
Manny Moons wrote:
progodlegend wrote:
Insurance values are tied to the mineral costs, when they go up, the insurance will go up.

Though this raises the question, will the insurance react to the extra materials increase, or does it not include those. If it doesn't include them, then yes you are right insurance needs to be looked at. I'll make sure to bring that up at the next meeting, because that's a minor fix that may have been overlooked.

Just look at the lowly Procurer. Current build cost is about 21 million isk. You can buy one in Jita for 9 million. Platinum insurance payout is 2,043,391. That pretty much sums up the problem with "Extra Materials".


I think it more exhibits a problem with the usefulness of the procurer if demand is so low that people aren't even bothering to build it.

There is an average of 200 procurers being traded every day in jita, with occasional spikes of a few thousand units.

There is an average of 50 scorps traded everyday in jita, with spikes to 200 units. Between 20 and 40 megathrons are traded each day. Same for typhoon, with some frequent spikes around 200 units. Factor in the lack of attention of people for the procurer prior to the barge rebalance, the silly price of it's BPO compared to the cost of the ship (over 1.4b for a ship that used cost less than 10m to produce). Almost nobody had a procurer not wanted one, and now, they sell almost as fast as tornados.

Almost every nullsec player have one or two scorps lying somewhere that they used once, when ECM was the flavor of the month. Almost every highsec mission runner have a raven that he'll never lose, and eventually sell for a CNR, golem or whatever. A good bunch of nullsec people do as well. Many manufacturers already have researched BS BPOs, and are probably already getting as many as possible out while they're cheap.

My point: t1 and t2 BS are much more frequents in hangars than procurers were before their rebalance, often in lower demand. Between people reselling their old assets, industrialists stockpiling them and speculators hoarding them, I dont see the stockpiles for BS lasting less than 1 year.


Procurers cost like 2m isk each to build, before the patch. Nowhere near as many extra battleships will be built as extra procurers were built.

Member of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal
Jayrendo Karr
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#122 - 2013-05-03 20:45:05 UTC
Illest Insurrectionist wrote:
Jayrendo Karr wrote:
OH BOY, MORE BARRIERS TO ENTRY FOR NEW PLAYERS!!!


1. New players shouldn't be flying battleships. They lack the support skills. They lack the financial support for replacement.

2. Bigger doesn't equal more fun.

3. The other re-balancing efforts have made great strides for newer players across the board. Good job completely ignoring those.

I don't mean NEW, but in EvE 1 year is still new to the game. No bigger doesn't equal more fun, but the BS is already questionable in price effectiveness. If CCP wants to see more **** blow up, they should make **** easier to obtain.
Perihelion Olenard
#123 - 2013-05-03 20:46:18 UTC
Although I may not like the price increase for the sake of my wallet, their reasons for it make sense. It's well thought out.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#124 - 2013-05-03 20:56:34 UTC
I'm going to call it...

The more "unpopular" changes to certain battleships combined with an overall increase in battleship build costs is going to create a massive shitstorm shortly after the expansion comes out (because the majority of the game don't use the forums or read the DEV blogs).

How did you Veterans start?
Camios
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#125 - 2013-05-03 21:01:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Camios
I really don't understand why I can still see armageddons around. If I only had more money!

If I only had an active account when the barge rebalance happened I would have made billions for sure. Now I won't let this chance go.

There's only one thing that concerns me: while the price tiers between frigates and between cruisers were not useful, I think that price tiers in the battleship line would have been useful. Cost begins to be a thing to consider when you have to decide between 100 millions and 250 millions... but if battleships are boosted it is completely fine and right and proper to adjust their production cost.
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#126 - 2013-05-03 21:20:08 UTC
Jill Antaris wrote:
Hm sounds like the new BS prices will be something around 160-200M, so around 40-60M for the hull after insurance. Sounds a bit harsh compared to BC prices(keep in mind stuff like guns and rigs is also quite a bit more expensive). On the other hand I like to see the throw away BS go.

I would still like to see that BC's have to use large rigs, to even out the price difference a bit.


Also keep in mind that they will introduce capital rigs with odyssey. This will dramatically increase the demand for salvage materials and thus drive up costs for battleship sized rigs significantly.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Hagika
Standard Corp 123
#127 - 2013-05-03 21:25:32 UTC
Illest Insurrectionist wrote:
Jayrendo Karr wrote:
OH BOY, MORE BARRIERS TO ENTRY FOR NEW PLAYERS!!!


1. New players shouldn't be flying battleships. They lack the support skills. They lack the financial support for replacement.

2. Bigger doesn't equal more fun.

3. The other re-balancing efforts have made great strides for newer players across the board. Good job completely ignoring those.



Because every Joe Schmoe has a right to jump from his Pinto to a Flashy 300,000 dollar 600 horsepower Ferrari.

It may not be smart and he will more than likely crash it, but its his right to do it. Same rule applies here. They may not be ready for a BS, but when they lose it, they gain experience on why not they should not be flying it.

It also provides us prowlers a yummy kill.

People do not need to be hand held and directed to fly certain ships as pushed by the Devs or isk cost.

My first real loss when I was a noob years ago was bringing out a Navy raven to a small gang fight. I had it poorly fitted and blew most of my isk on it.

When it got smashed, i realized my mistake real quick. People need that reminder., because most fail to listen to others because they do not like being told what to do in a game they play for fun.

They need to really understand why they do not need to be in it, by taking that loss and feeling the effects.

Did I also mention it gives us older players a yummy kill?
Zimmy Zeta
Perkone
Caldari State
#128 - 2013-05-03 21:48:23 UTC
Evelgrivion wrote:
While you can't make an overpowered ship balanced by increasing its price, cost effectiveness, a function of capability offered by the ship and modules equipped and the price at which those abilities are bought, does play a part in developing fleet doctrines. As things are today, battleships are rarely used unless one needs the longer range that select sniper platforms offer, or a larger buffer for triage support. They are already too slow, a minimal improvement over most Battlecruisers, and insufficiently survivable to be deployed outside of situations where buffer is more important than mobility. The Tier 3 Battlecruisers have made Battleships more or less irrelevant in many circumstances, and now they're going to be even more expensive than they were before?

Unless in a monolithic ball, or working under a doctrine built around the Micro Jump Drive, why would I want to fly a Battleship without the support of Recons, Tech 3s, and Triage Carriers? Battleships are increasingly becoming the poor man's tool in Capital Ships Online, and this only exacerbates the situation.


+ rep

The whole tiericide concept for battleships had one major flaw from the very beginning, and that was CCP refusing to acknowledge that "cheap and expendable" has always been a valid and important role for some battleships.

I'd like to apologize for the poor quality of the post above and sincerely hope you didn't waste your time reading it. Yes, I do feel bad about it.
Bigg Gun
T.I.E. Inc.
#129 - 2013-05-03 21:54:28 UTC  |  Edited by: Bigg Gun
In Soviet Russia, Kenny kills them!


In other news , I thought all BS prices were going to be the same as today's tier 2 ships. So I thought abaddon was about to go down some 5-60 mil, not apoc up.

BTW not sure if somebody asked but, are faction BS mineral prices staying the same?


Did I mention that other than the 40 + men fleet BS's are not very good choice due to their lack of get_the_hell_out_ableness. Now, instead of encouraging the players to actually try and play with BS class in smaller gangs you make em stick to BC sized or smaller.

On top of actually nerfing some BS's ???


Interesting tactics... I wonder why. Who bribed you you bastards ??? Tell me who was it ???!
Arele
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#130 - 2013-05-03 22:09:55 UTC
Manny Moons wrote:
progodlegend wrote:
Insurance values are tied to the mineral costs, when they go up, the insurance will go up.

Though this raises the question, will the insurance react to the extra materials increase, or does it not include those. If it doesn't include them, then yes you are right insurance needs to be looked at. I'll make sure to bring that up at the next meeting, because that's a minor fix that may have been overlooked.

Just look at the lowly Procurer. Current build cost is about 21 million isk. You can buy one in Jita for 9 million. Platinum insurance payout is 2,043,391. That pretty much sums up the problem with "Extra Materials".

That and ME levels don't affect the requirements on the extras tab. Another 'short term' oversight that for some things has been going on for years with no follow-up patch to change. I realize they're worried about 'minerals out of thin air' but it's by far the laziest approach they could have taken to dress that concern.
Warde Guildencrantz
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#131 - 2013-05-03 22:49:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Warde Guildencrantz
does this mean a scorp will cost 250mil despite having nothing but a high switched to a low?

if it does...how can that be justified...it hasn't changed enough to constitute a tripling of cost.

i dont know squat about build costs so if it is going down in price rather than up, just quote me and say i'm an idiot

TunDraGon ~ Low sec piracy since 2003 ~ Youtube ~ Join Us
Bucca Zerodyme
Good For Nothing Corporation
#132 - 2013-05-03 22:51:36 UTC  |  Edited by: Bucca Zerodyme
CCP Rise wrote:
Hello everyone!

but we looked into some metrics around player wealth and income and found that EVE players are making money faster and faster, and even new players should have no trouble enduring the bump in cost.

CCP Rise


Lets see what new players can do in EvE currently:
- Missions
- Mining
- FW
- Incursions
- WH
- Ratting
- Anomalies

Now lets ask them, if they want to buy a BS:
- Missions: Would be nice but grinding lvl 3 is boring
- Mining: dont need a BS, i need a Mackinaw
- FW: no, Destroyer or Cruiser is enough
- Incursions: I need a BS to get even started
- WH: Dude, we use T3
- Ratting: Would be nice, but they are so slow
- Anomalies: Yeah, but im not sure, need to look out for PvP a lose is expansive

So im pretty sure, only Mission-Running newbies, would want to buy a BS, and as long as i remember missions dont increase in payout.
Grunnax Aurelius
Banana-Republic.
Shadow Cartel
#133 - 2013-05-03 22:54:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Grunnax Aurelius
With the cost increase on Teir 1 and 2 Battleships id rather spend the same amount of cash on the new Navy Faction Battlecruisers as they will have a plethora of more uses and capabilities, aswell as their survival capabilities.

All in all I don't support the cost changes one bit.

I have a feeling once the Navy Battleships and the possibility of Pirate Faction Battleships get a re-work that the prices of those thing are going to be stupid and no one will buy them except for those people with an ISK V a g i n a!!!

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=342042&find=unread
Panhead4411
Rothschild's Sewage and Septic Sucking Services
The Possum Lodge
#134 - 2013-05-03 23:23:52 UTC
CCP Rise wrote:


It would be nice, but aren't willing to underestimate the extreme patience of the player base and so its hard to imagine how we could do it in the forseeable future.


Nice to see you care nothing about insurance...since it is sorta tied to the base mineral costs...

But seeing as you haven't gone back to fix the insurance on anything you have altered as of yet...

Question for you CCP, can you look into exactly how many T1 ship build orders have been started AFTER all these mineral changes have hit, seeing as with most of the T1 fleet, they currently cost WAY more to build than they are selling for. Any player who does even the simplest research will see it is pointless to build most T1 ships after this release hits TQ. (yes, the BS's will 'recover' quicker than the others simply b/c of their initial investment is higher)

Or am i wrong? Procurors anyone?

http://blog.beyondreality.se/shift-click-does-nothing    < Unified Inventory is NOT ready...
Illest Insurrectionist
Sparta.
#135 - 2013-05-03 23:26:24 UTC
Hagika wrote:
Illest Insurrectionist wrote:
Jayrendo Karr wrote:
OH BOY, MORE BARRIERS TO ENTRY FOR NEW PLAYERS!!!


1. New players shouldn't be flying battleships. They lack the support skills. They lack the financial support for replacement.

2. Bigger doesn't equal more fun.

3. The other re-balancing efforts have made great strides for newer players across the board. Good job completely ignoring those.



Because every Joe Schmoe has a right to jump from his Pinto to a Flashy 300,000 dollar 600 horsepower Ferrari.

It may not be smart and he will more than likely crash it, but its his right to do it. Same rule applies here. They may not be ready for a BS, but when they lose it, they gain experience on why not they should not be flying it.

It also provides us prowlers a yummy kill.

People do not need to be hand held and directed to fly certain ships as pushed by the Devs or isk cost.

My first real loss when I was a noob years ago was bringing out a Navy raven to a small gang fight. I had it poorly fitted and blew most of my isk on it.

When it got smashed, i realized my mistake real quick. People need that reminder., because most fail to listen to others because they do not like being told what to do in a game they play for fun.

They need to really understand why they do not need to be in it, by taking that loss and feeling the effects.

Did I also mention it gives us older players a yummy kill?


No. This is EVE.

You have a right to nothing.
Onnen Mentar
Murientor Tribe
#136 - 2013-05-03 23:29:57 UTC
Yes cost should not be the balancing factor.

No that does not mean everything within the same class should be equally expensive.

There are many ways to add/keep flavour, cost is one. Hope you'll all break free from the shackles of tiericide soon.

Also, can we get a solution to offgrid links yet?

Minmatar Balancing, 3 suggestions.
Jerick Ludhowe
Internet Tuff Guys
#137 - 2013-05-03 23:31:50 UTC
time to start buying tier 1 bs, incoming massive profit
Emu Meo
Doomheim
#138 - 2013-05-03 23:59:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Emu Meo
So battleships are going to become a rarer site on the battlefield. Not really as big a deal as some of you are making out though. Most people who fly them have no business in one anyway, and barely have the skill reqs needed. A welcome change in my opinion. BC will become even more the ship of choice for most small roaming gangs as it should be. And I'm sure the big alliances will still be able to afford the extra cost to go for BS's.

One thing I would ask for though, with BC's becoming so effective these days, the price increase to fit them fully with T2 equipment compared to a full T2 fit frigate, does not collerate to the extra price paid for the standard hull.

Ie when you compare a fully T2 fit frigate to a fully T2 fit BC, the T2 fit frigate is too expensive in comparison. This is probably due to the fact that a lot of T2 modules are shared between all classes of hulls. One way to solve this would inevitably mean hull specific modules, and I think this would be a good change for the game.

At the moment the cost of a damage control to protect a capital ship is the same as the cost to protect a t1 frigate. I think everyone would agree that isn't right.
Lelob
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#139 - 2013-05-04 00:08:10 UTC
Honestly with the buff's these bs will be getting, along with the incredible inflation atm, I don't see this as being a real problem. I'm sure alot of speculators are going to make massive bank on this change, and the markets will be screwed for at least 6 months+, but 40mil is barely anything for the changes so I wouldn't be surprised to see demand for these bs skyrocket.

In truth, I think that with some of these bs like the domi, you may be seriously under-estimating the value that players will be willing to pay for the massive changes that they're receiving.
Alexa Coates
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#140 - 2013-05-04 00:09:33 UTC
wait so you're telling me all bs's will have similar prices? AND they're going to be shittier than current?

Guess im sticking with t2 cruisers and bc's even harder now.

That's a Templar, an Amarr fighter used by carriers.