These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

High sec Mission runners just got completely screwed by CCP

First post First post
Author
Twenty Five Percent
Doomheim
#221 - 2014-03-21 15:25:04 UTC
Nerf Dinsdale
Barton Breau
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#222 - 2014-03-21 15:32:39 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Ill wire you 10mil for your effort if the reference does indeed answer the question as thanks for the help.

Again, see above. Getting 100% back from what's been produced is a moronic mechanic and obsoletes existing mechanics that are supposed to provide the same functionality.


What other mechanics provide the functionality to get 100% back from what has been produced?
Salvos Rhoska
#223 - 2014-03-21 15:35:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Tippia wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Ill wire you 10mil for your effort if the reference does indeed answer the question as thanks for the help.

Again, see above. Getting 100% back from what's been produced is a moronic mechanic and obsoletes existing mechanics that are supposed to provide the same functionality.


But this is false and besides the point. You are not grasping the real issue at hand here.

The market for reprocessing trash is not related to compression in anyway shape or form, except in the pre-patch incarnation where 425mm shipments had to be first manufcatured in high sec from extant materials, and then REPROCESSED in null for the minerals they require. THAT is what was silly. That you could manufacture 425mms in high, and move them to Null for not only 100% efficiency in REPROCESSING them but also with less volume required. Null entities argue this was necessary because they feel, for one reason or another, that that was better than meeting their own mineral needs from the space they have availqble to themout there.

This was indeed silly, but its the null entities prerogative to do so, since it was indeed possible. The system allowed them to ship minerals, in the form of 425mms, with reduced volume, for a 100% efficiency payout upon arrival. By all means not an unequitable solution, but definately silly.

This is no longer the case as a result of the other elements of this change, namely compression changes and higher null refinement efficiency of ores themselves. There is no longer a need for the 425mm trick. Null can compress ores for purposes of shipment, and leverage those at their own high efficiency installations as well as their own local ores.

For better or worse, the above is not the matter of dispute or the point of this thread. All speculation and derailment aside, this is unrelated to the *insignificant* additional and superfluous non-ice/ore refinmenet efficiency change. This separate issue is not at all insignificant, it infact has universal ramifications across all secs, in that it categorically reduces the base value of all refinable non-ore/ice materials EVERYWHERE. This affects both player made and looted items. The cost of production is not increased, but the value of all such items is depressed by their reduced reprocessing yield.

You are confusing two unrelated issues.

The proposed additional non-ice/ore refinement change results in a flat, universal, sec irrelevant reduction in the value of ALL refinable items such as ships and modules. A 100% efficiency was indeed silly, but the proposed change takes it to BELOW that of ice/ore refinement with no recourse to improving it based on station or sec.

Why would anyone skill into non-ice/ore refining now?
Not only will there be less refinable materials brought in from wrecks, because they are worth less and players simply wont bother to loot and transport them to market, but the base value of those refinable items themselves is depressed by the reduction in efficiency in refining them.

Net result: Nobody will bring int trash anymore. And nobody will skill non-ice/ore refinement, because not only is the market devoid of materials to refine but the value of those items is in and of itself also depressed to where if instead you bought and refined ore/ice, you would be laughing.

Do you understand what I am saying?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#224 - 2014-03-21 15:51:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Barton Breau wrote:
What other mechanics provide the functionality to get 100% back from what has been produced?

“The same mechanic” being mineral compression to facilitate materials logistics.

Salvos Rhoska wrote:
But this is false and besides the point.
It's not false, and it answers your question, which makes it on as on point as can be.

Quote:
The market for reprocessing trash is not related to compression in anyway shape or form
The market for reprocessed trash will adjust and is pretty irrelevant on the whole — it's just gun mining, which should be nuked to tiny bits anyway. It relates to compression because reprocessing is currently the mechanism used to compress minerals, so it is related in every shape and form. Since mineral compression—not refining of “scrap”—is supposed to provide the mechanism that… you know… compresses minerals, the ability to go through the scrap process needs to be shot in the knees until it really hurts.

I'm not confusing two unrelated issue; you're confused by not seeing how they (very obviously) relate.

Quote:
Why would anyone skill into scrap refining now?
Because the skills are still useful for other purposes and because it gives you more minerals from your scrap, and people will still bring that in by the bucketload as using their Noctium and “loot all” buttons. Oh, and some modules will still provide better (volume) compression than going through the proper mechanism, so there will still be a market for them.

If people are really upset that their crap is less worh looting now (and it was never worth it to begin with), they can ask CCP to up the mineral content to compensate… It doesn't change the fact that scrap reprocessing offered exactly zero margins for real compression and that to provide such a margin, it needed to be reduced a whole lot. It's much the same problem as with all the benefits highsec industry currently offer, really.
Barton Breau
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#225 - 2014-03-21 16:01:22 UTC
Malcanis wrote:


What's going to happen is that the thousands of industrial players who really were "forced" to move - to hi-sec - are going to be given the realistic and viable option to conduct production activity in 0.0



Unfortunately this is not "just an option to move back to null", it also creates the same problem you have percieved with compression in the reverse, the ore will not be snailed to high to get refined and mineral compressed, it will flow compressed to null, be refined and minerals snailed to high. You know how people are about "15% extra".

Not even talking about what i do care about, reprocessing and mineral compression...

The problem in general is that that the overhaul has too many goals, does not seem to achieve them, so they look just like excuses so that whenever anyone points out that goal A can hardly be achieved someone (like you? :) is able to say "but but but goal B!"

Example, intentionally a neutral one:

"104+% (old) refine from POS refineries with skills 0 does not motivate people to skill refining!"
"But but but we NEED to give POS refineries a advantage!"
Salvos Rhoska
#226 - 2014-03-21 16:03:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
@Tippia:

Your evasive reply and refusal to address key facts and ramifications is now sufficient to concern me that there are indeed vested interests in these proposed changes and that all attempts to objectively discuss the actual issues will be deliberately stonewalled and sabotaged.

I will express my dissent by withdrawing from this discussion. Have it "your" way.
Kitty Bear
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#227 - 2014-03-21 16:15:38 UTC
Items that are manufactured by players, are valued by the materials and process required to make them.
What they refine into is a non issue as far as pricing goes.

Meta1-3 Items afaik have always had 2-3 uses
Invention Mutators
Cheap/Disposable Fitting Options
Refining

By reducing the amount of minerals recovered from the reprocessing of mission loot, it shifts the emphasis towards Mining as a source of minerals .... go figure, who'd have thought that mining was a source of minerals, *gasp, shock, the horror*

SOV space needing to either mine locally, or ship the raw ore/minerals in as ore/minerals ... I'd call that a good change as well.







Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#228 - 2014-03-21 16:21:02 UTC
Hmmm I really am missing where people are going for this 100% reprocessing :(

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#229 - 2014-03-21 16:23:35 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
@Tippia:

Your evasive reply and refusal to address key facts and ramifications is now sufficient to concern me that there are indeed vested interests in these proposed changes and that all attempts to objectively discuss the actual issues will be deliberately stonewalled and sabotaged.
Roll Riiight.
Try not moving the goal posts as much and maybe the answer will be less “evasive". Since you can't express what's been missed, the stonewalling is all yours.

In the meantime, the simple fact of the matter remains: scrap refining obsoletes existing, purpose-built mechanics, and nothing that really matters is affected by introducing a margin (through an efficiency reduction) that give those mechanics room to breathe. If you don't want to discuss this actual issue, you don't get to accuse others of not taking any other, ill-defined, marginal, or even imagined issues into account.
Salvos Rhoska
#230 - 2014-03-21 16:29:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
As is in your sig, I dont care enough to argue on decisions that have already been made outside my purview, with vested individuals who demonstrably have no intent to discuss objectively.

This discussion is a farce, the outcome already decided, and I want no part in it.
You are free to dig your own hole. I will not waste time or effort preventing you from doing so.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#231 - 2014-03-21 16:39:54 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
As is in your sig, I dont care enough to argue on decisions that have already been made outside my purview, with vested individuals who demonstrably have no intent to discuss objectively.
You mean like people who wilfully ignore the actual reasons and logic behind a change, only to shout “no-one has provided any reasoning or logic for this change"?

Yes, the discussion becomes a bit farcical at that point…
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#232 - 2014-03-21 16:44:20 UTC
Twenty Five Percent wrote:
Nerf Dinsdale


This isn't necessary at all.


He's not the least bit effective and could probably stand to have certain attributes buffed.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#233 - 2014-03-21 16:46:36 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Tippia wrote:
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Ill wire you 10mil for your effort if the reference does indeed answer the question as thanks for the help.

Again, see above. Getting 100% back from what's been produced is a moronic mechanic and obsoletes existing mechanics that are supposed to provide the same functionality.


But this is false and besides the point. You are not grasping the real issue at hand here.

The market for reprocessing trash is not related to compression in anyway shape or form, except in the pre-patch incarnation where 425mm shipments had to be first manufcatured in high sec from extant materials, and then REPROCESSED in null for the minerals they require. THAT is what was silly. That you could manufacture 425mms in high, and move them to Null for not only 100% efficiency in REPROCESSING them but also with less volume required. Null entities argue this was necessary because they feel, for one reason or another, that that was better than meeting their own mineral needs from the space they have availqble to themout there.

This was indeed silly, but its the null entities prerogative to do so, since it was indeed possible. The system allowed them to ship minerals, in the form of 425mms, with reduced volume, for a 100% efficiency payout upon arrival. By all means not an unequitable solution, but definately silly.

This is no longer the case as a result of the other elements of this change, namely compression changes and higher null refinement efficiency of ores themselves. There is no longer a need for the 425mm trick. Null can compress ores for purposes of shipment, and leverage those at their own high efficiency installations as well as their own local ores.



They don't want perfect refine on modules or hulls. Get over it already. Loss is good for the game, and making mistakes and massively overproducing before tieracide should not be rewarded with perfect escape options or minerals that didn't exist before.

Quote:


For better or worse, the above is not the matter of dispute or the point of this thread. All speculation and derailment aside, this is unrelated to the *insignificant* additional and superfluous non-ice/ore refinmenet efficiency change. This separate issue is not at all insignificant, it infact has universal ramifications across all secs, in that it categorically reduces the base value of all refinable non-ore/ice materials EVERYWHERE. This affects both player made and looted items. The cost of production is not increased, but the value of all such items is depressed by their reduced reprocessing yield.

You are confusing two unrelated issues.



We are not confusing unrelated issues. CCP is defining the "processing" and "reprocessing" business in a way you don't like.

Quote:


The proposed additional non-ice/ore refinement change results in a flat, universal, sec irrelevant reduction in the value of ALL refinable items such as ships and modules. A 100% efficiency was indeed silly, but the proposed change takes it to BELOW that of ice/ore refinement with no recourse to improving it based on station or sec.

Why would anyone skill into non-ice/ore refining now?
Not only will there be less refinable materials brought in from wrecks, because they are worth less and players simply wont bother to loot and transport them to market, but the base value of those refinable items themselves is depressed by the reduction in efficiency in refining them.

Net result: Nobody will bring int trash anymore. And nobody will skill non-ice/ore refinement, because not only is the market devoid of materials to refine but the value of those items is in and of itself also depressed to where if instead you bought and refined ore/ice, you would be laughing.

Do you understand what I am saying?


I own a near full set of gallente subcap hull BPOs + various other popular hulls. As it turns out, hulls don't compress minerals very well (and in any case it was never sensible to haul too many hulls at once because of ganking), so as a highsec producer of subcaps I had ample ballast capacity in freighter runs between hub and production line to haul minerals instead of compressed ore if it so turns out minerals are cheaper on any given day. I used to buy 3b+ of minerals in a day. Hull builders (probably largest consumers anyway) will still buy minerals.

People will still grab modules that are now worth half a million isk, and those minerals still make up the vast majority of the minerals derived from looting. ie someone ignores 10 x objects with 15k isk value of minerals (current system), and takes the meta 425mm railgun that has (current system) 1mil of minerals then they will still be bringing back most of the minerals in the new system.

Yes it will be worth less, but at the same time people playing this game (ie picking up all the reproc from all the minor mission hubs), got whole new stacks of orders they can run (for raw minerals to compress). ie you just got reasons for being able to compress or refine minerals, in lieu of reduced need for scrap metal refining. Its all fine if you (as CCP does), define the profession as covering the spectrum, instead of the one subset that you want to.

Salvos Rhoska
#234 - 2014-03-21 16:50:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Tippia wrote:
---


Compression is unrelated to people refining minerals from ships/modules either produced by players or brought in from wrecks.

Compression means nothing to a mission/ratter/plexer when he decides whether to bring back the trash he finds or not.
It also means nothing to a non-ore/ice refiner who is buying what those players bring back in order to turn a small profit by reselling the minerals.

Compression also means nothing to the fact that this change concretely reduces the base value of ALLl non-ice/ore refinables, as a factor of their mineral yield when refined.

This whole compression issue is a null sec concern, and as I already demonstrated, the prime silliness was null entities shipping 425mms with lower volume for a high mineral reprocessing on arrival.

You are again confusing two separate issues.

The former was already corrected twofold in the proposed change due to improvements to compression and higher refinement efficiency in null sec. The latter, the actual topic of this thread, of the additional nerf of non-ice/ore refining to the point where nobody will bring back trash and nobody will skill for refining them, is as of yet still unanswered and unjustified.
Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#235 - 2014-03-21 16:51:16 UTC
I am looking forward to the GD forum threads this summer.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#236 - 2014-03-21 16:52:25 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
As a result of this extraneous change, every non-ice/ore refinable in the item gets a net nerf in base value due to the reduced efficiency of minerals you can get out of them.

Anyone who potentially profits from bringing in loot from wrecks is negatively affected by this, as are the non-ice/ore reprocessors who make their trade off what they bring in.
While I agree it's a reduction in the income from scrap, that was never really a profession anyway. Mission runners make more isk from LP rewards and mission blitzing than from the loot, and will still be the main source of salvage.

If you look at it from the mining point of view, miners were previously getting screwed because on-the-side income from missioners was directly affecting the mineral price. On top of that, ore compression was utterly pointless as modules existed to do that job better instead. That has now been turned into a viable tradeskill.

Then you have the effect on industry. Previously, you could manufacture a whole heap of most items, then if the market dropped away just recycle them back to minerals and try something else. Now industrialists will be forced to commit to a product, which is a good thing. If you mess up and you build 2 million units of something and they won't sell, you either have to take the hit or keep pushing sales. You can't just effectively undo your manufacture and try something else.

And speaking objectively, if you look at this from the point of view of someone brand new, so not involved in any side of the debate, they way it will work is balanced. You are upset as your current method of isk generation will require a rethink, as will many others. You're not being objective by saying "this is how it affects me, therefore this is bad".

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#237 - 2014-03-21 16:52:38 UTC
Tauranon wrote:

They don't want perfect refine on modules or hulls. Get over it already. Loss is good for the game, and making mistakes and massively overproducing before tieracide should not be rewarded with perfect escape options or minerals that didn't exist before.

…in fact, this lets them scale down—or even eliminate completely—many of the “additional materials" requirements introduced by tiercude ahead if time and without waiting for old stockpiles to be depleted. This rather simplifies things for manufacturers since we can start going back to just one single materials consumption stat.
Salvos Rhoska
#238 - 2014-03-21 16:56:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Salvos Rhoska
Lucas Kell wrote:
You are upset as your current method of isk generation will require a rethink, as will many others. You're not being objective by saying "this is how it affects me, therefore this is bad".


I do not generate my isk through this method. So your conclusion is false.

However I can objectively recognise that there is even less incentive to bring trash back from wrecks, and that the base value of all non-ore/ice refinables is reduced universally as a factor of their now reduced mineral yield, and that the tiny margins currently possible for trash refiners will be squeezed out of existence by this change.

This essentially kills the trash refining profession. The margins are no longer profitable. And as OP points out, it is a direct nerf to mission/ratters/plexers, no matter how small or "wrong" their activities might have been.

The reduction of efficiency to below ore/ice efficiency is unnecessary. The problem posed by 425mm shipping was not related to this, and has already been resolved in the other two core aspects of the change, namely compression and higher yields in null facilities. Nerfing the base mineral value of all non-ice/ore items is superfluous to that, and solves nothing. It has no justification.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#239 - 2014-03-21 16:57:34 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
The latter, the actual topic of this thread, of the additional nerf of non-ice/ore refining to the point where nobody will bring back trash and nobody will skill for refining them, is as of yet still unanswered and unjustified.

Of course they will. People will still be bringing in salvage and it's no big step to pick up the modules. Some of those will still sell for > refine value, since they are useful modules (meta 3 and 4 usually), leaving you the stuff you normal just refine because it's too much of a pain to sell. That one small subset of the overall income is being reduced by 27%, it's not all mission income being nerfed.

Not to mention, that up until recently, half of you didn't even fetch the loot since it was a pain in the ass to do! A cheap mobile structure now automates that loot collection for you. I'd be willing to bet that the increase in loot collected due to the mobile tractor unit far outweighs the reduction in value of meta 1 and 2 modules refine values.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Erotica 1
Krypteia Operations
#240 - 2014-03-21 16:59:17 UTC
The only certainty I see from this whole thing is that the compressed ore margin scam will be much less attractive.

That, and my stacks of millions of low value mission loot I bought in market will change in price.

See Bio for isk doubling rules. If you didn't read bio, chances are you funded those who did.