These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#681 - 2014-03-28 07:19:56 UTC
Any change to highsec is just CCP intentionally ******* with Dinsdale because the result is highly amusing.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.

Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#682 - 2014-03-28 07:36:32 UTC
I cant believe I come into this thread now for a break

"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

Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#683 - 2014-03-28 07:46:53 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
The 45% nerf is utterly irrelevant to the majority of the game, since it's worth less than 5% of a missioners income, and is worth zero to anyone that doesn't loot wrecks (so blitzers, miners, producers, traders, etc).


Loot is worth significantly more than 5% of a missioner's income, closer to about 20%. Missions like Mordus Headhunters pay out 12-20M ISK in loot and salvage, the variability is due to the number and type of good modules being dropped. I'm not interested in quibbling about the details, but as a professional salvager and mission runner I can assure you that mission loot is a lot more than 5% of my income!

The reprocessing change is a blow to the income of people who rely on mission loot for income. There's no question about that. It will especially degrade the incomes of people like Pro Synergy who specialise in salvaging missions. All this means is that some people earn a little less ISK than they used to. They'll have to learn to diversify.

Dinsdale is just being his usual Chicken Little self. He recognises that there is a problem, then proceeds to bark up the wrong tree.

The only issue I have with the reprocessing changes is allowing outposts to have a better refine efficiency than POSes.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#684 - 2014-03-28 08:03:28 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
The 45% nerf is utterly irrelevant to the majority of the game, since it's worth less than 5% of a missioners income, and is worth zero to anyone that doesn't loot wrecks (so blitzers, miners, producers, traders, etc).


Loot is worth significantly more than 5% of a missioner's income, closer to about 20%. Missions like Mordus Headhunters pay out 12-20M ISK in loot and salvage, the variability is due to the number and type of good modules being dropped. I'm not interested in quibbling about the details, but as a professional salvager and mission runner I can assure you that mission loot is a lot more than 5% of my income!
Loot is, yes, but what portion of loot is junk to be refined? Data from individuals and groups that work with it (including Pro Synergy) shows that it's around 8% of the overall income of a mission.

So when you think that only that 8% is being reduced, while the rest of the loot and income remains the same, that means an overall reduction in missioner income of less than 4%. I nudged that number up a percent to account for edge cases.

Mara Rinn wrote:
The reprocessing change is a blow to the income of people who rely on mission loot for income. There's no question about that. It will especially degrade the incomes of people like Pro Synergy who specialise in salvaging missions. All this means is that some people earn a little less ISK than they used to. They'll have to learn to diversify.
Indeed, but the reduction is not at the scale that some are stating, it's around the sames a the null bounty nerf. Not to mention that MTUs made looting shockingly more efficient, so in comparison to pre-MTU efficiency, missioners will still be up.

Mara Rinn wrote:
The only issue I have with the reprocessing changes is allowing outposts to have a better refine efficiency than POSes.
Why would that not be the case? A null outpost costs billions to set up and billions to keep running in sov bills. If a POS could do it better, that would be one hell of a blow, not to mention that it would make wormholes even more lucrative than they already will become. It would also remove the intentional difference they are putting in between null and high, by allowing a POS anywhere to refine at the highest possible rate.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#685 - 2014-03-28 08:26:17 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:


And you are assuming ALL refining is going to be done in 0.0. Which is HIGHLY doubtful. Considering even in a station you are still coming out where you were before. Not everyone is getting the 18% increase. EVERYONE is getting the 45% Decrease. Does this make sense to you? Or do you seriously think people are going to run minerals to NS to Refine 200 more pieces of Trit than they can get doing the same in a HS station?

Hey look guys my one 1 batch of Veldspar bought me 1 block of fuel to get it to the refinery I am making bank brah!


There are at least 2 minmatar outposts 1 JF jump from Jita.


Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#686 - 2014-03-28 12:48:20 UTC
Tauranon wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:


And you are assuming ALL refining is going to be done in 0.0. Which is HIGHLY doubtful. Considering even in a station you are still coming out where you were before. Not everyone is getting the 18% increase. EVERYONE is getting the 45% Decrease. Does this make sense to you? Or do you seriously think people are going to run minerals to NS to Refine 200 more pieces of Trit than they can get doing the same in a HS station?

Hey look guys my one 1 batch of Veldspar bought me 1 block of fuel to get it to the refinery I am making bank brah!


There are at least 2 minmatar outposts 1 JF jump from Jita.




Yup.

And T1 ship mfg in high sec will be wiped out because of it.
The CSM goon posted on the failed lawyer's web site that building a BS will be around 17% cheaper in null than high when you factor in the huge refining efficiency bonus null sec was just handed.

So the null sec cartels will now be able to jump out compressed ore, jump back with 7 BS hulls.
mynnna stated on goon Pravda that null sec now has a 25-30M advantage over high sec, per hull.
So net profits, worst case scenario, are in the 120-180 M range. round trip.

Bye bye high sec T1 ship mfg near a major high sec hub.

So not only do mission runners and low skilled miners in high sec get killed, T1 ship manufacturers in high sec are also ruined. (and of couse, so are any capital ship manufacturers in low sec. I used to build Archons, Moros, and Thanatos near Jita, bu those days are over as well.)

And all this does not even factor in all the other "big changes" coming by June, that at least 3 CSM members have stated are coming. Just like in the real world, in Eve the huge profits and income is in the manufacturing of finished products. The countries that only provide raw materials, and provide no added value, are impoverished.

Which is what high sec just became, a provider of raw materials and nothing more.

Oh, and I say that knowing that at the moment, according to the null sec propagandists, null sec does not make T2 products, but provides the raw materials and intermediate products. I expect that T2 manufacturing in high sec will be ruined soon as well with either an outright nerf to high sec, or a massive buff to T2 mfg in null sec, or both.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#687 - 2014-03-28 13:23:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Yup.

And T1 ship mfg in high sec will be wiped out because of it.
No, it won't. The costs are prohibitively high and the volumes are too low to ever make that happen.
You do realise there's a pretty significant difference between Minny outposts and Amarr outposts, right? And you realise that they can't exist in the same system?

Quote:
So not only do mission runners and low skilled miners in high sec get killed, T1 ship manufacturers in high sec are also ruined.
…except, of course, that mission-running and low-skilled mining is still around and won't be particularly affected, and that T1 ship manufacturing will still be done in highsec because the logistics of it are simply better and because that's where the market is still.

T1 manufacturing will happen near trade hubs for the same reason T1 manufacturing has always happened near trade hubs: because it's quick and easy money with immediate and trouble-free access to both materials and installations, and because the trade volume is so high that it can trivially support a vast number of people doing it.

Quote:
and of couse, so are any capital ship manufacturers in low sec. I used to build Archons, Moros, and Thanatos near Jita, bu those days are over as well
Why? Nothing changes in that regard. You can't blame your own choices on changes in irrelevant game mechanics.

Quote:
Which is what high sec just became, a provider of raw materials and
…of all kinds of manufactured goods, and of ISK, and of trading opportunities. Kind of like how it is now.

Quote:
Hey, when you live to see high sec destroyed
What makes you think that will ever happen?
Anomaly One
Doomheim
#688 - 2014-03-28 13:24:30 UTC
Yay now we can get back to this thread!
HI DINSDALE!!

Psychotic Monk for CSM9 https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=326497 you want content in highsec? vote Monk

Jenn aSide
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#689 - 2014-03-28 13:27:39 UTC
I'm a high sec mission runner and i don't feel screwed by this change. I do feel screwed by this thread though. Less conspiracy, more cowbell I always say.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#690 - 2014-03-28 13:32:29 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
I'm a high sec mission runner and i don't feel screwed by this change. I do feel screwed by this thread though. Less conspiracy, more cowbell I always say.


Sometimes conspiracy is a good source of inspiration. I'm going to suggest that our CSM representitives make it their mission to make CCP bring in only changes that will directly affect Dinsdale in a negative way.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#691 - 2014-03-28 13:35:41 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Jenn aSide wrote:
I'm a high sec mission runner and i don't feel screwed by this change. I do feel screwed by this thread though. Less conspiracy, more cowbell I always say.

Sometimes conspiracy is a good source of inspiration. I'm going to suggest that our CSM representitives make it their mission to make CCP bring in only changes that will directly affect Dinsdale in a negative way.

It also works as an excellent reverse smell test: if Dindin is against it and believes it to be a conspiracy against him, it's probably at least a 90% good change.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#692 - 2014-03-28 14:08:16 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:


Yup.

And T1 ship mfg in high sec will be wiped out because of it.
The CSM goon posted on the failed lawyer's web site that building a BS will be around 17% cheaper in null than high when you factor in the huge refining efficiency bonus null sec was just handed.

So the null sec cartels will now be able to jump out compressed ore, jump back with 7 BS hulls.
mynnna stated on goon Pravda that null sec now has a 25-30M advantage over high sec, per hull.
So net profits, worst case scenario, are in the 120-180 M range. round trip.



I think the JFs are just going to go back 1 jump with mins for production line capacity reasons (and profit for JF pilot reasons).

Quote:



Bye bye high sec T1 ship mfg near a major high sec hub.

So not only do mission runners and low skilled miners in high sec get killed, T1 ship manufacturers in high sec are also ruined. (and of couse, so are any capital ship manufacturers in low sec. I used to build Archons, Moros, and Thanatos near Jita, bu those days are over as well.)



nope. Highsec will be fine.

Can see how the cap business in low might be hard. but given you have to move mins in nullsec, moving them to a non-capturable station in low instead, isn't really any different imo. You might actually need to form a business relationship with someone to secure you mins. How terrible would that be.

Quote:


And all this does not even factor in all the other "big changes" coming by June, that at least 3 CSM members have stated are coming. Just like in the real world, in Eve the huge profits and income is in the manufacturing of finished products. The countries that only provide raw materials, and provide no added value, are impoverished.



Australia would be impoverished if we weren't exporting so much iron ore. Should see the wobbles the place gets whenever the price drops. You also have no idea what the changes are.

Quote:


Which is what high sec just became, a provider of raw materials and nothing more.

Oh, and I say that knowing that at the moment, according to the null sec propagandists, null sec does not make T2 products, but provides the raw materials and intermediate products. I expect that T2 manufacturing in high sec will be ruined soon as well with either an outright nerf to high sec, or a massive buff to T2 mfg in null sec, or both.


You have no idea what the changes are.

Silvetica Dian
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#693 - 2014-03-28 17:36:35 UTC
Scipio Artelius wrote:
Xeronikus wrote:
Well, this solves all the issues I pointed out for all the other 99.X% of the players who are interested in null space but dislike the current conditions I mentioned earlier.

How much of it is real knowledge and how much of it is just assumption though?

Not you specifically, just all of us. It's often written on here that gaining sov for a small group is near impossible, but when was the last time one actually tried after looking for a suitable location?


Just FYI we are in the process of trying. It is hard work but we are making ground.
Also living in npc null and ratting in sov space owned by people that won't undock with a red in local is super easy.
Cloaky camping, running all their sigs and forcing them to constantly batphone their coalition to defend their POCO/POS against a group they heavily outnumber on their own. There numbers drop daily and we own the POS on their TCU in their form up system atm (also their only tech moon).

This isn't buffer we are trying to take though. It is their heartland. Maybe we will never take it but it is fun trying and we are making life hell for their ratters, their pvpers and their miners. We haven't started actually hitting the sov itself yet but it is defacto ours over a large part of the region as they don't dare use it any more.

Anyway ignoring the normal Dinsdale tinfoil i wanted to address the "i tried living in null and hated it thing"
npc null corps are usually pvp/ pve hybrids and often have very little CTA /red pen BS and just roam for fun.
renter corps tend to have plenty of pve and usually no CTA at all.
no one invades proviblock except to have funs. the sov gets left alone.
other people are out here solo or in very small groups doing PI, exploration, mining based out of POS's , pirate missions etc
There are so many null lifestyle options and trying a big alliance and hating it just means you hate the big alliance lifestyle rather than every version.

Finally if some people stop looting and some move to other space then the price of meta 4 modules (esp guns) will rise offsetting the loss of reprocesing income. Having more people move out of high sec and creating more ecological niches in eve is a good thing. chain running incursions, missions or mining as a playstyle must get old and creating incentives for people to try something more exciting (even if it is doing the same in different space) must be a good thing.

hopefully i will see a few more of you at the far end of my gunsights.

Money at its root is a form of rationing. When the richest 85 people have as much wealth as the poorest 3.5 billion (50% of humanity) it is clear where the source of poverty is. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/20/trickle-down-economics-broken-promise-richest-85

Hasikan Miallok
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#694 - 2014-03-28 17:41:15 UTC
Jenn aSide wrote:
I'm a high sec mission runner and i don't feel screwed by this change. I do feel screwed by this thread though. Less conspiracy, more cowbell I always say.


Eve really does need more cowbell.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#695 - 2014-03-28 20:00:00 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
The only issue I have with the reprocessing changes is allowing outposts to have a better refine efficiency than POSes.
Why would that not be the case? A null outpost costs billions to set up and billions to keep running in sov bills. If a POS could do it better, that would be one hell of a blow, not to mention that it would make wormholes even more lucrative than they already will become. It would also remove the intentional difference they are putting in between null and high, by allowing a POS anywhere to refine at the highest possible rate.


Sure, an outpost costs tens of billions of ISK to set up and upgrade, almost as much as a single titan. The advantage that outpost has in refining efficiency will pay for the entire outpost in a few months of reprocessing. So you can stop crying your crocodile tears right there. Nevermind that outposts can't be destroyed so you'll never actually lose the materials you leave behind when someone captures it (just capture it back, or stay in the outpost so you can ship stuff out). Capturing back an outpost is a whole lot easier than taking back a POS that has been destroyed.

There are different refineries available for low/null which are more efficient than the hi sec ones. You need to read the devblog.

Other advantages that an outpost has over a POS:

  • Unlimited storage space
  • Many more activity lines
  • No fuel


You can't dock a thousand carriers and dreadnoughts at a POS. So the advantages of an outpost are already worth the fees otherwise people wouldn't deploy and upgrade them.

The advantage of unlimited storage space will turn up again when CCP start talking about manufacturing lines.
Dinsdale Pirannha
Pirannha Corp
#696 - 2014-03-28 20:41:28 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:
The only issue I have with the reprocessing changes is allowing outposts to have a better refine efficiency than POSes.
Why would that not be the case? A null outpost costs billions to set up and billions to keep running in sov bills. If a POS could do it better, that would be one hell of a blow, not to mention that it would make wormholes even more lucrative than they already will become. It would also remove the intentional difference they are putting in between null and high, by allowing a POS anywhere to refine at the highest possible rate.


Sure, an outpost costs tens of billions of ISK to set up and upgrade, almost as much as a single titan. The advantage that outpost has in refining efficiency will pay for the entire outpost in a few months of reprocessing. So you can stop crying your crocodile tears right there. Nevermind that outposts can't be destroyed so you'll never actually lose the materials you leave behind when someone captures it (just capture it back, or stay in the outpost so you can ship stuff out). Capturing back an outpost is a whole lot easier than taking back a POS that has been destroyed.

There are different refineries available for low/null which are more efficient than the hi sec ones. You need to read the devblog.

Other advantages that an outpost has over a POS:

  • Unlimited storage space
  • Many more activity lines
  • No fuel


You can't dock a thousand carriers and dreadnoughts at a POS. So the advantages of an outpost are already worth the fees otherwise people wouldn't deploy and upgrade them.

The advantage of unlimited storage space will turn up again when CCP start talking about manufacturing lines.


Talking about manufacturing lines?
You mean nerfing the crap out of the quantity of high sec lines, because the same null sec cartels are crying tears over that too.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#697 - 2014-03-28 21:24:17 UTC
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Talking about manufacturing lines?
You mean nerfing the crap out of the quantity of high sec lines, because the same null sec cartels are crying tears over that too.

No. Just reducing the number of free and universally available lines to sensible levels and rewarding those who invest in creating lines of their own and/or increasing the number of lines you get for making those investments. Most likely, both will happen (largely since both need to happen).
Mario Putzo
#698 - 2014-03-28 23:08:58 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Dinsdale Pirannha wrote:
Talking about manufacturing lines?
You mean nerfing the crap out of the quantity of high sec lines, because the same null sec cartels are crying tears over that too.

No. Just reducing the number of free and universally available lines to sensible levels and rewarding those who invest in creating lines of their own and/or increasing the number of lines you get for making those investments. Most likely, both will happen (largely since both need to happen).


Likely you are right, considering that overall production must drop to coincide with the reduction of mineral availability, this would be a perfect time to reduce the "free" lines available to the playerbase. Otherwise without a reduction in production availability, you are going to have a massive bout of market inflation on hand.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#699 - 2014-03-28 23:17:02 UTC
Mario Putzo wrote:
Likely you are right, considering that overall production must drop to coincide with the reduction of mineral availability, this would be a perfect time to reduce the "free" lines available to the playerbase. Otherwise without a reduction in production availability, you are going to have a massive bout of market inflation on hand.

Mineral availability isn't being reduced, though, nor would it have any connection with a required reduction in free manufacturing facilities. And either way, reducing those manufacturing lines would certainly not keep any inflation at bay.
Mario Putzo
#700 - 2014-03-28 23:24:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Mario Putzo
Tippia wrote:
Mario Putzo wrote:
Likely you are right, considering that overall production must drop to coincide with the reduction of mineral availability, this would be a perfect time to reduce the "free" lines available to the playerbase. Otherwise without a reduction in production availability, you are going to have a massive bout of market inflation on hand.

Mineral availability isn't being reduced, though, nor would it have any connection with a required reduction in free manufacturing facilities. And either way, reducing those manufacturing lines would certainly not keep any inflation at bay.


Oh it most certainly is being touched. Unless you believe all reprocessing will be done in Nullsec from now on (don't make me laugh).

You are either going to have more market competition as "gun miners" go to market to maintain current production.
Or you are going to have less production as "gun miners" take 45% longer to gain required production minerals.

You simply CAN NOT, have one without the other. It is mathematically impossible.

Either less production, or more miners.

Or Market inflation.

Im not sure what you and Lucas find so hard about this. Unless of course you really think that Minerals reprocessed from missions/ratting/plexing/PVP Loot never reach the market as raw minerals or as produced goods. Use your head.

And clearly you do not know what market inflation is.